NEWSMAX

5, 4, 3, 2, 1. You're watching TVPN. Today's Monday, December 1, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultradome. The temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Ramp time is money. Save both easy use corporate cards. Build.

Foreign. You're watching TVPN. Today's Monday, December 1st, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultradome. The temple of technology. The fortress of finance. The capital of capital. Ramp time is money. Save both easy use corporate cards. Build.

Pushed back. At the same time China raised to get as many machines as possible before export controls tightened. Okay, that makes sense. Sash Zatz says Oxford Dictionary didn't get the memo. Apparently rage bait named. I think. I think it. No, no, no. I think they're actually right that it would be the word of the year. But it is so funny that you posted this and then Oxford Dictionary. Yeah. So this is true Rage according to the BBC. Rage bait named Oxford word of the year 2025. It certainly feels that way on the timeline. Your post. 1 million views on this 3.6 thousand likes. People really? This really set the agenda for a little bit. Wow. Congratulations. What a banger. Essay. Should TVPN do a word of the year? I like that. Or motion. Motion. Motion might be our word of the year. Word of the year. Motion's the word of the year. Motion named word of the year 2025 by TPP. If you have it. You'll know. You'll know. We'll call you. Tyler has motion. In other breaking news, Keith Raboy.

So, yeah, rough time out there if you're not growing regardless of the revenue scale. Two days ago, we shared that Enron back. November 29, 2001. Nvidia replaced Enron in the S&P 500. I saw this post go out from our incredible team and I immediately googled to fact. I was like, there's no way someone has made a terrible mistake on our team and we are doing fake news unironically now. We used to have some fun, but apparently this is real. It's real, it's real. Hamilton was like, I'll take that spot. November 29th. Obviously, that's not how it works. It is much more mathematical than that. I believe Standard and Poor's picks the largest companies and after certain ebbs and flows of the market, they swap folks in and out. But this went pretty viral. 5,000 likes. But what is really interesting is of course the. The Nvidia and Rod comparisons are just so silly to me. Obviously, it's like the discussion is like, will it go from being the best business in the entire history of the world to being somewhat competitive and have to deal with minor competition from other people? It does not seem like it's some ridiculous Enron situation. That's so insane. People are just having fun with that headline. But what is incredible is that this branded shirt he's wearing. Look at this thing. Fantastic. So awesome. I love it. Not enough people trying to go snipe vintage Nvidia merch. It's a great shirt. It's a great look, and I feel like it's gotta make a comeback. The button down. This is the pre Silicon Valley. I'm just in a T shirt era. But it's post suits. You know, it's like, we're not suits. We're working in technology. We're still gonna throw on a collar, but we're going to dress it down a little bit. No tie. Guys, scroll up. Scroll up on this for a second. Yeah, I'll keep going. Keep going. Oh, who's not. Who's not following? Tyler, you got to follow the account. No, this is not my account. I think this is a. This is more of like a burner account situation. Oh, it's a. It's a scraper that we use to. For the. It is. It is. You got to correct that. Tyler, come on. That's not. Gorkum over at Fall had an absolute banger. This was a chart.

Go. 5, 4, 3, 1. You're watching TVPN. Today's Monday, December 1, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultra Dome, the temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Ramp time is money save. Both easy use, corporate cards, bill payments, accounting and a whole lot more all in one place. We have a special guest, special guest today, opening the show with us, Alby from the land down under, please. Probably saw him go viral recently, but why don't you introduce yourself? Yeah, so I just. I actually arrived in LA on Saturday. Welcome. Yeah, I'm from Sydney or Wollongong, so about an hour and a half from Sydney. And yeah, I've been building something called Finkel, which is basically duolingo for life skills. And I just applied to YC as well with that post on X. How many views did you get on the application video? I think it got like 7.8 million. So, yeah, let's. Hit the gong for Alby. Well done. Well done. So give me an example of a life skill that you can learn.

With, with large chunks of the country suspicious and left out. Yeah, I just worry that we don't know the shape of what we're regulating yet. Like the unintended consequences of social media took five, 10 years to develop. I mean, two years ago we were reflecting on this. People were worried about AI killing everyone and creating the Terminator. And then what wound up happening? Well, it wasn't really political misinformation. It was much more people chatting with it for a really long time, going crazy. You know, maybe overbuilding, maybe risk in the debt markets. Like the risks were very hard to predict. There were risks, but it wasn't exactly what we thought. And so I'm always, I'm a little bit like hesitant about like, you know, maybe there should be regulations. But how, when will we be confident that we know how to regulate it? Is it right? Is now the right time? Do we have clarity? Because a lot of the stuff it stands on, you know what, we already have fair use, we already have copyright protections and so a lot of it can be enforced through the courts, I would imagine. But of course, if new problems come up, they need to be resolved and that's the way we resolve them in a democratic society. I think that's fair. The places I focus on are jobs and American citizenship. And I agree with you on the jobs part, but it just feels like the jobs we haven't seen a collapse. And even people building the AI technology are like, this is going to put everyone out of jobs and that's good. And the people that hate the technology are saying it's going to put everyone out of a job and that's bad. And it's kind of crazy because they all agree that the jobs are going away. And yet what do you get when you actually look at the jobs figures, it seems like we still have jobs. It seems like we actually can't delegate to the AI. And I can't just say, hey trucker, I want the AI to handle this one. The technology is not there yet. And will it be a year? Will it be 5 years, 10 years, 100 years? There's a whole bunch of incentives to say it's coming right now. And it's hard to get a read on. And predicting, pretty predicting when things will happen is fortunes are won and lost on that alone, totally agree with you. John Maynard Keynes said we'd all be working 15 hour work weeks and he was on any more about economics than any of us. So it's hard to predict. But I think what we can do is when you look At Darren A. Smoglu, who says, well, why don't we have a neutral tax code so we're not incentivizing depreciation of investment in technology and automation over hiring people. I mean, there are things we can do that make it that we prioritize having people in the loop, and then there are things we can do in our social media environment that protect us as citizens and kids. Two things are like, let's eliminate bots. Right. Elon Musk talked about doing this on X, and there's still a ton of bots, but a lot of the bots that use AI are, in my view, hurting our democracy. And then let's protect kids from some of the harms on social media. Yeah, you know, so, yeah, I guess I, you know, I love sparring with folks and I appreciate sort of the criticism I've gotten from some of the tech folks for the tweets on AI and drivers. But I guess what I would hope for tech people listening to this is don't resist every form of regulation and sort of dismiss people's anxieties. Instead, be part of how we get smart regulations and how we answer people's concerns. Because if 70% of the American people believe the American dream is dead and have a concern about a, like, the answer to that for anyone who's been, like, in a relationship is not to dismiss it and say they're dumb. It's to say, okay, how do I address that anxiety so that we can move forward? And I guess, I guess my hope would be that there'll be more tech leaders like that. Victor Peng is one who's a former leader at amd. I mean, there's some people who are thinking in that way, and I think it's in Silicon Valley's interest to have that kind of. No, that makes sense. I think you really, you really freaked people out with there should be a tax on mass job displacement. Well, there is a tax on the profits, right? Like we tax profits. So, yeah, I mean, there's a question.

Created jobs. And it has made life easier for many people. You brought up Mamdani. He made a post, I think it was yesterday or the day before that a bunch of Silicon Valley types were agreeing with, which was, you know, you don't. You haven't seen that very often. It was around basically around SMB deregulation. Making it easier to get a small business off the ground. Is that, should that be a more important conversation in every state and region? I feel like growing up in California, I've seen so many businesses try to get off the ground and you end up seeing a finished restaurant that just has its door closed because they're waiting on some permit or something like that. And it's obviously hard enough to start a restaurant. And it seems like oftentimes local governments can get in the way. Do you think that needs to be just a bigger part of the conversation? As you know, given that starting a business is a great way to insulate yourself from at least some job displacement risk with. With AI? Yes, it does. And look, Zoran became famous in part with his halal video where he was basically saying it takes too much regulation to have a halal stall and we need to streamline that. And so I believe, yes, we need to make it easier for people to start a small business to be their own business owner. That's not just making the permitting easier, it's also making sure people have access to capital. A lot of times that's a barrier. But I'll tell you one thing that I think is often a blind spot for folks in my district. I love small businesses. I love entrepreneurs. I think that there's a lot of people who want to build wealth. Completely agree. Completely agree. We love small businesses too. But here's the but, okay, most Americans, most Americans are not going to go. Just start a small business like this. This idea that every person in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where I grew up, or western Pennsylvania, should start a startup or build a business. Like my dad never did that. He had a middle class life. He worked for the same company for 30 years. And there are a lot of people who just want a decent job and. They just want a job that can support a family. And there's nothing wrong with that if they want to be in manufacturing or. They want to be a nurse or they want to be a child care provider. And so sometimes our rhetoric becomes like, why can't everyone become an entrepreneur? It's like, why can't everybody become a politician? Now, maybe an entrepreneur is a better life. But like a lot of people just don't want to do that. And they still want to have the American dream. And so all I'm saying is let's think about how to help small business owners, but let's also think about the 4 million people who are drivers and. Like, what is their life going to look like? And it's important to have that balance. Give me some lessons from the recent trip to China.

With, with large chunks of the country suspicious and left out. Yeah, I just worry that we don't know the shape of what we're regulating yet. Like the unintended consequences of social media took five, 10 years to develop. I mean, two years ago we were reflecting on this. People were worried about AI killing everyone and creating the Terminator. And then what wound up happening? Well, it wasn't really political misinformation. It was much more people chatting with it for a really long time, going crazy. You know, maybe overbuilding, maybe risk in the debt markets. Like the risks were very hard to predict. There were risks, but it wasn't exactly what we thought. And so I'm always, I'm a little bit like hesitant about like, you know, maybe there should be regulations. But how, when will we be confident that we know how to regulate it? Is it right? Is now the right time? Do we have clarity? Because a lot of the stuff it stands on, you know what, we already have fair use, we already have copyright protections and so a lot of it can be enforced through the courts, I would imagine. But of course, if new problems come up, they need to be resolved and that's the way we resolve them in a democratic society. I think that's fair. The places I focus on are jobs and American citizenship. And I agree with you on the jobs part, but it just feels like the jobs we haven't seen a collapse. And even people building the AI technology are like, this is going to put everyone out of jobs and that's good. And the people that hate the technology are saying it's going to put everyone out of a job and that's bad. And it's kind of crazy because they all agree that the jobs are going away. And yet what do you get when you actually look at the jobs figures, it seems like we still have jobs. It seems like we actually can't delegate to the AI. And I can't just say, hey trucker, I want the AI to handle this one. The technology is not there yet. And will it be a year? Will it be 5 years, 10 years, 100 years? There's a whole bunch of incentives to say it's coming right now. And it's hard to get a read on. And predicting, pretty predicting when things will happen is fortunes are won and lost on that alone, totally agree with you. John Maynard Keynes said we'd all be working 15 hour work weeks and he was on any more about economics than any of us. So it's hard to predict. But I think what we can do is when you look At Darren A. Smoglu, who says, well, why don't we have a neutral tax code so we're not incentivizing depreciation of investment in technology and automation over hiring people. I mean, there are things we can do that make it that we prioritize having people in the loop, and then there are things we can do in our social media environment that protect us as citizens and kids. Two things are like, let's eliminate bots. Right. Elon Musk talked about doing this on X and there's still a ton of bots, but a lot of the bots that use AI are, in my view, hurting our democracy. And then let's protect kids from some of the harms on social media. Yeah, you know, so, yeah, I guess I, you know, I love sparring with folks and I appreciate sort of the criticism I've gotten from some of the tech folks for the tweets on AI and drivers. But I guess what I would hope for tech people listening to this is don't resist every form of regulation and sort of dismiss people's anxieties. Instead, be part of how we get smart regulations and how we answer people's concerns. Because if 70% of the American people believe the American dream is dead and have a concern about a, like, the answer to that for anyone who's been like, in a relationship is not to dismiss it and say they're dumb. It's to say, okay, how do I address that anxiety so that we can move forward? And I guess, I guess my hope would be that there'll be more tech leaders like that. Victor Peng is one who's a former leader at amd. I mean, there's some people who are thinking in that way, and I think it's in Silicon Valley's interest to have that kind of view. No, that makes sense. I think you really freaked people out with there should be a tax on.

I think it's been a wake up call for California. That makes sense. Any quick comments on the current state versus federal AI regulation? We didn't get to touch on that earlier. And you had some Comments recently on SB10, 10:47, the bill in California. But what's your updated view on where regulation should be happening? Look, ultimately we need a federal regulatory framework. But the way you get good federal legislation is having legislation in the states. That's federalism. And I don't understand how you would have a moratorium on having state legislation when federal legislation right now looks bleak. The prospects of it are bleak. It is such an unpopular position even among Republicans. So my view is build a consensus that you can have thoughtful regulations at the federal level and work on that. Don't stop states from regulating. And this idea that, okay, you're going to stop all the growth. I mean, my district is $18 trillion of value. We've got five companies over a trillion dollars east of the Mississippi. There's not a single trillion dollar. You know, California is undefeated. It's so good. You talk to folks in like Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where I grew up, and they're like, come on, come on. Using more wealth than ever before. Like what we want to know is how is, how are our kids going. To fit into this? Yeah. And I just think that, that I wish more tech leaders, you know, who. Sometimes gets it is a Jensen Wong. Is talking about this. Like. Yeah, I mean I've had. How do we create economic development opportunities in places that have been left out? How do we make sure that everyone comes along on the revolution? I just think it's in tech companies interests to embrace this in a similar way as the economic royalists embrace the New Deal eventually. I mean, you can't have just a capitalism that is only working for some with, with large chunks of the country suspicious and left out. Yeah. I just worry that we don't know the shape of what we're regulating.

Created jobs. And it has made life easier for many people. You brought up Mamdani. He made a post, I think it was yesterday or the day before that a bunch of Silicon Valley types were agreeing with, which was, you know, you don't. You haven't seen that very often. It was around basically around SMB deregulation. Making it easier to get a small business off the ground. Is that, should that be a more important conversation in every state and region? I feel like growing up in California, I've seen so many businesses try to get off the ground and you end up seeing a finished restaurant that just has its door closed because they're waiting on some permit or something like that. And it's obviously hard enough to start a restaurant. And it seems like oftentimes local governments can get in the way. Do you think that needs to be just a bigger part of the conversation? As you know, given that starting a business is a great way to insulate yourself from at least some job displacement risk with. With AI? Yes, it does. And look, Zoran became famous in part with his halal video where he was basically saying it takes too much regulation to have a halal stall and we need to streamline that. And so I believe, yes, we need to make it easier for people to start a small business to be their own business owner. That's not just making the permitting easier, it's also making sure people have access to capital. A lot of times that's a barrier. But I'll tell you one thing that I think is often a blind spot for folks in my district. I love small businesses. I love entrepreneurs. I think that there's a lot of people who want to build wealth. Completely agree. Completely agree. We love small businesses too. But here's the but, okay, Most Americans, most Americans are not going to go. Just start a small business like this. This idea that every person in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, where I grew up, or western Pennsylvania, should start a startup or build a business. Like my dad never did that. He had a middle class life. He worked for the same company for 30 years. And there are a lot of people who just want a decent job and. They just want a job that can support a family. And there's nothing wrong with that if. They want to be in manufacturing or they want to be a nurse or they want to be a child care provider. And so sometimes our rhetoric becomes like, why can't everyone become an entrepreneur? It's like, why can't everybody become a politician? Now, maybe an entrepreneur is a better life. But like a lot of people just don't want to do that. And they still want to have the American dream. And so all I'm saying is let's think about how to help small business owners, but let's also think about the. 4 million people who are drivers and, like, what is their life going to look like? And it's important to have that balance. Give me some lessons from the recent trip to China. I'm fascinated by how they're dealing with AI.

Margin. 40 points of margin. 50 points of margin. I can't risk the TPU being late because ADS runs on that. Gemini runs on that. Yeah. Can you, can you give any takes on the Nvidia's $2 billion investment in Synopsys that got announced this morning? I don't know if you saw it. I'm assuming you did. Yeah. So in a time where, you know, let's say the two biggest chip makers, Broadcom and Nvidia, are making more money than ever and everyone else in the supply chain and all the hyperscaler are trying to design more and more chips. Everyone's. Everyone's sort of working on that. You've got the EDA vendors are at the lowest possible valuations or lowest valuations that they've had. They're still very expensive, but lowest valuations they've had on a earnings multiple basis for a long time. And this is on the eve of, hey, objectively, are there going to be more chip designs or less chip designs in five years? A lot, lot more. Right now the flip side is AI chip design is coming. There's 20 plus companies doing AI chip design. We've got a really long article coming on that soon that'll sort of explain the landscape. But AI chip design is going to shake up everything. So the question is like this, is AI. AI chip design. Correct? AI helping chip design, whether it's for AI chips or for like power chips. Okay, yeah. And so, so the question is like, you know, Nvidia. Nvidia has a lot of tools internally, right? The, the dirty. The thing about EDA is that there's three companies that own 95% of the revenue. But at the same time, Google and Nvidia and Broadcom and all these guys also design a lot of their tooling internally, although they are massive customers of all three vendors. Right. So it's kind of like an oligopoly where the customers also contribute a lot. And so Nvidia's whole goal here is like, how do I get every EDA flow working on GPUs? Because today a lot of it is running on, on FPGAs, a lot of it's running on CPUs, and AI. AI chip design is going to get a lot more AI influenced. How do I get everything working on GPUs in terms of, like the operation of it, even if it's helping people design, not GPUs. Right. And I don't have enough engineers to work on all the software. They've open sourced a lot of software, right? Like Culitho, it's software for lithography, right? And they've got all this software up and down the chain, all the way from lithography to laying out chips and all these other things. They just want to make it all run on GPUs. And so that's what their goal here is, right? And now they've given Synopsys a huge, huge. They're buying Synopsys at the lowest valuations that Synopsys has ever had with all this cash that they were going to give away in dividends or buybacks anyways, and they're getting Synopsys to now make GPUs first class, right? And so I think this is a win win for Synopsys and Nvidia. Well, we could go way longer, but I know what's on your calendar. You got to hit the gym. Thank you so much for coming by and chatting with us. This is really helpful. Have a great rest of your day. Enjoy the holidays with your family. Great catching up. We'll talk to you soon. Cheers. Goodbye. See you, guys. See you. Let me tell you about public.com investing. For those who take it seriously, they got multi app.

Way that just makes it feel like cohesive with each other, you know. And so that's a different problem, I would say, altogether. Yeah. There was some debate on the why doesn't the cursor for video exist yet? Do you have any thoughts there? What's the cursor for video? Basically a nonlinear editor, like a Premiere Pro, a DaVinci Resolve, an Adobe After Effects for video. Cursor for video, like replacing the actual bones of the software that the editor that the video creator uses. There's been a couple apps that have spun up Runway. Originally the reason I was using it back in the day was for green screen, for Chroma keying, basically it was fantastic for that. And it feels like that building a canvas, building an nle that feels like one potential pathway to victory. It's also very difficult because you can't just fork VS code. There are no leading open source NLEs. On the flip side, if you wanted to play nice with Adobe, you could be a vendor a la the way nanobanana is now vended into Photoshop and that could be a solution. And there's a variety of ways to win. I'm interested in hearing your approach. Yeah, definitely an interesting question. And by the way, shout out for you for being an OG on Runway since 2019. Yeah, something like that. Crazy. I love you. Yeah. My two thoughts are, first, the art of NLE and editing and film. It's an art and it's just a lot of pacing and details that are very nuanced and specific. It's about granular details. And it's hard for, I would say model or a system to automate that level of decisions. That's on a purely NLE side. But I would say, at least for us, more interestingly is the question of do we need an NLE in the first place? Like, do we actually need these primitives? If you think about nonlinear editing, this idea that you're like stacking frames of video against each other and you're cutting them. Before it was with physical erasers and now we have detail erasers. You're cutting things together. My bet is that you probably won't need NLEs. That whole paradigm will feel like a fax machine in a few more years. And so I feel it's somewhat what's happening with the Devens and the Claude codes and the codexes of Vodka video. I do wonder if there's going to be an intermediate step or maybe it'll just be absorbed by the current NLEs. I mean, I'm sure that's what your customers are using, right? Yeah, I don't know. We'll see it play but I'm not too fond of pushing better versions of NLEs out there. I think there's something around how you make videos and how you interact with this AI systems that just naturally allows itself a different primitives and if you think also about the fact that very soon you'll start to see this happen in real time, like when you make real time narrative work or videos or experiences. How do you want to call them? You don't need to edit things async because you're generating on the fly and you have people interact with them and so it changes. That's what I'm saying. It changes the nature of those things in the first place. And there's a transitional period where we're seeing NLE's being augmented with AI, but I think it's that transitory. I don't think it's going to pay out like in the long run. Yeah, yeah, no, I think has. Has Hollywood capitulated yet? What's going on there? We, we had.

Making a shitload of money off of everyone, you know? Yeah. How talk about kind of Jensen's leverage that he has around Rubin allocations as some of these customers start to at least consider TPUs. Yeah. So as far as like next year's TPU deployments, it's pretty set in stone for the vast majority of the volume. Right. Anthropic's got a bunch of and then there's some sprinkled else elsewhere. But as we go into 2028, where Google can actually ramp, you know, the flip side is Ruben is also ramping. And at least based on our research, looking throughout the supply chain, you know, over a year ago when OpenAI started, their chip team, they poached like 15 Google people overnight, right? In one week, like someone I knew I heard was like, oh yeah, I'm joining OpenAI. Then I text like another three people I know and they're like, oh yeah, I'm also joining. I'm like, what the fuck? So, so Google's a lot of their best TPU engineers have left, right? They also have a ton left. And so that what that's done is, you know, chip timelines are so long. That didn't affect TPV7, that's affecting TPV8. At the same time, Google's trying to diversify their supply chain, get from not just broadcom, but also MediaTek. And so Google's got a real challenge on TPV8 in that it's good, it's an improvement. But then when you go look at what Nvidia is doing with Rubin, Rubin is so much better because Nvidia is just pedal to the floor, paranoid as fuck. We have to be the best and we have to be way, way, way better than everything because how much better I am than everyone else is my margin. Right? And so Nvidia, Nvidia has the sort of like, at least currently, we think Nvidia is going to be so much better that they'll be fine and they'll be able to maintain margins. Right now things can happen. Ruben can delay or TPUs can delay and the position looks better or worse, Right. There's a lot of unknowns to go through. But as far as like, what is Jensen's leverage is, look, I'm going to make the best hardware I and plus my software advantages and I'll be able to continue to be dominant and dominate the market. Right? There's, there's curveballs that could go which is like, oh, Google software, they could open source enough software that actually their software ecosystem is not far behind Nvidia. Maybe they don't want to, right? Or hey, they could, you know, they could execute everything and Nvidia has a 3, 6 month delay now all of a sudden they're a lot more competitive, right? And so all these things are still open questions, but it's, it's. Nvidia can play the allocation game as well, of course. Right? Hey, I'm going to give all of the GPUs initially to companies that probably could buy GPUs, but that ends up being all the AI labs and hyperscalers, right? At least, you know, like meta, right? And Bytedance, people that would actually be willing to buy TPUs. And then you end up with this like weird situation where, okay, well that's like 75% of the GPU market anyways. When I look at the AI labs through the Neo clouds, right, when there's Nebbys and Iris Energy and all these other core weave and all these folks are deploying for OpenAI anyways, right, this sort of ends up being like, well, sure, I could stiff some people in the allocation, but at the end of the day, everyone who is a potential customer for GPUs is sophisticated enough to be where they were going to be on the beginning of the allocation anyways, right? How are you framing cluster max these days? Is it, is it for customers who want to buy services?

To pay me more than the mid sized companies in the world. Okay, question from the chat. And the price is discriminated based on. That, would you change the rating of a Neo cloud if Sholto promised to do the dishes for two weeks straight? You know, there was an argument. I saw someone was like, who does the chores? And it's like, brother, we live together by choice. You know, we pay someone to come once a week if you cook something, you do your own dishes. But like, you know, for. Frankly, we're working so much and I think, like, you know, I think. I think Dorcas has ordered pizza from the same spot three nights in the row before. Right. Like, it's. Wait, so question is, being an adult man with roommates, underrated. So I haven't lived with people in years. And then when I moved to sf. So you came back. This is crazy. I moved with. I moved to SF this year. You know, I'm like, oh, you know, I should live with friends, just so it's more fun. And the first house kind of fell apart, so I moved into this house with these guys, and we've been talking about it for months. I love it. Right? It's like, look, we, we. We have, you know, if you think about, oh, what if we all rented our own places that were good and then we pulled that budget together? We have a nice place. Yeah, right? And then in that place, we have plenty of space for ourselves. Yeah. We pay for someone to come and clean once a week. Right. So at the end of the day, what is. What is. The negative here is like, well, we're living with our friends. It's just guys being dude. Where, like. If you do bunk beds, you have more room for activities. Exactly. Anyway, no, sorry, actual question from the chat. When is TPU going on Inference. Max, we got to know.

And negotiations. Yeah, yeah. The other buried lead in the article was of course about pre training. So there's a snippet in here. OpenAI's leading researchers have not completed a successful full scale pre training run that was broadly for a new frontier model since GPT4O in May of 2024. And you know, this, this is, it's so interesting that this, this, like if this was wrong, you would imagine that there would be a whole bunch of reaction from OpenAI people or like proxies or surrogates, right? People quote tweeting and be like, that's just not true. Wow, something else is cooked. But the fact that I haven't seen anyone respond to this and say like, oh, this is wrong, like we actually did not that like that's the North Star for what the business is like. The business's job is to create profits, right? It's not to you know, complete successful full scale pre training runs. That's not the goal. That's just something that they might do in service of making a better model, making a better product. But ultimately it's whatever the customers want. And if the customers are happy with 4o level base pre train and a bunch of reasoning on top, that's fine. So what, what else is in the back and forth? People are also, I mean really, it does make me.

You're not really even trying to do foundational science necessarily. You're more productizing company. Yeah, it's a business, which is great. We love that. What's interesting about Ilia is that when we talked about this, it is a venture style bet. Like let the scientist go, experiment, maybe it will work out. It's extremely high risk, probably a zero, but if it works, it's huge. Right. So the expected value is still high. What's crazy is that we're doing a a venture style bet at growth scale and it's just massive amount of capital for something that. I think the consensus here is that it's either he solves it and it's incredibly valuable and leapfrogs everything and is just amazing or it's just you do get lost and you get lost in the sea of research and ideas and you never really produce anything. So I love the high risk bets. I just understand why people are saying what at that scale, that's a lot of money. That's a lot of money. But that has been happening internally at Google for a long time. They probably burned a lot of money on research projects. Hasn't been that big of a deal because they had the engine for it. And if the investors are significantly diversified, they should be fine. Anyway, what else is in the timeline today? FIN AI, the AI that handles your customer support. The number one AI agent.

Ordered. We ordered a hundred thousand black ones. Blue Owl. Blue Owl really has us by the balls. It's rough. Martin Shkreli here says the Sacks piece illustrates the exact problem with the New York Times. Voters specifically want this type of person, not a bureaucrat who has never worked a real job. Lena Khan, Case street so, yeah, that's. So the the issue and the reason I think this article was written is that New York Times subscribers specifically want this type of article. Whiskey titans going back and forth here. Did you.

So you have to do these like 25 different steps to get to some sort of conflict. It's a lot of like, you know. I read this and I think like this is if you're, if you're the average New York Times subscriber. Yeah, this is probably that you were, they were probably like very excited by this story, right? Yeah, I mean a lot of, I think a lot of people are definitely like, yeah, just riled up by the all in podcast. Charlie in the chat says all in pod about to be an all timer after this article. Do you think it's possible, possible that David and Jason coordinated to get this hit piece done to grow all in even further? They said we're at such an insane thing. Jason said a bunch of, I mean Jason made a lot of good arguments about this, but one thing was he was like we would be smaller.

Expertise in said industries. Yeah, some of these claims here, here's one it's sort of hard to, to track like so he says. Free, free from those. This is from the New York Times from the actual article for a screenshot. Free of those restrictions, Mr. Sachs flew to the Middle east in May and struck a deal to send 500,000American AI chips, mostly from Nvidia, to the UAE, the United Arab Emirates. The large number alarmed some White House officials who fear that China, an ally of the Emirates, would gain access to the technology. These people said. But the deal was a win for Nvidia. Analysts estimated that it could make as much as 200 billion from the chip sales. And so like I, we, we've covered the debate around export controls and should Nvidia, where should Nvidia be able to sell things? But it's never been an open and shut case in my mind. It's never been like, oh, it's so obvious that the UAE is completely off the table. Yeah, I don't know. Yeah, I mean it was also just like painting, painting the friendship between Sachs and Jensen as like something that, that felt wrong was. Yeah, was a little bit rough considering it's the most valuable company in the world. Yeah. One of the most important AI companies. Potentially the most important AI company if you just go by weight in the, in various indexes. So I don't, Yeah, I don't know. I mean it's like it's clear that he doesn't have Nvidia bags directly. Like that's completely debunked. So, so you have to do these like 25 different steps to get to some sort of conflict. It's a lot like, you know, I. Read this and I think like this is if you're, if you're the average New York Times subscriber. Yeah, this is probably.

And cares about the US leading in innovation. I'm grateful we have him. Brian Armstrong. Yeah. Here'S my takeaway. If you believe that AI and crypto are industries that we should support in the United States, then you want to have a czar focused on those things that generally feels positively about those things and, and wants to create the best possible environment for those industries to thrive in the US I think that there's actually a debate on both fronts, right. Like there's people on the left that think AI and crypto are just default bad, they want less of them. And there's people on the right that believe that too. But I think that ultimately there's arguments for why the US should lead in stablecoins, which is part of why the Genius act is important. And a lot of the AI action plan, there's going to be debates on individual points in that. But in general, I think creating an environment in the US where we can continue to lead in AI is important. So I think there wasn't. I didn't see any sort of smoking. Smoking gun in any of this stuff. There were some allegations around the. I don't think they smoke very much at all. I think it's mostly tequila drinking. That's true. They do all in tequila. Although JCAL does tote a gun regularly. Oh yeah. So maybe that's the smoking gun. He's a Texan. Yeah. No, I didn't see anything very specific. I mean it's all in like they are super connected. If you partner with them in some ways, like you would expect to get more of a read on where they're spending time in dc, what they're seeing. That seems like there are clear lines on what you can share, like what, what turns you into a lobbying firm and what doesn't. I think they've stayed out of becoming a lobbying firm and so they have clear, clear rules on that. Yeah, I think Boz distilled it pretty well before we read his post. Let me tell you about adeo, the AI native CRM. Adio. Builds scales and grows your company to the next level. Boss said, I don' David Sacks but I want more expertise in government. Experts tend to have made money in their area of expertise, have friends in their area of expertise. We have our people. If people can't have history or friends in a field before leading it, then our leaders won't know anything. And I thought this was a good distillation of like the core debate about like, should you have someone who has never participated in an industry overseeing it, or should you like someone who's purely academic, purely outside of it. And I believe there's some readers and probably people at the New York Times that would like somebody that hasn't participated in either industry to. To be running in a role like that. Yeah. And just blanket against both industries and sort of like, hold them back. So, so, so the. So the reaction is interesting in the comments. I mean, first top comment is somebody, like, beefing with Boz over how he ran the Quest Store. It's like, clearly a VR aficionado who, like, has an ax to grind over niche VR policies. But the second post is what I want to get to because it actually addresses the core claim here. And Alex says the construct you're thinking of is called a council. It's been used for a long time to allow the elected with limited knowledge on a domain to get a consensus of options from a range of experts. This minimizes conflicts and prevents kleptocracy. But like, isn't that what a czar is? I thought Sacks was a council. Like, he's not an elected official. Like, the elected official is Donald Trump, the president. And like, there's a variety of folks there. And then Sachs is like, appointed to this czar role that is just to give his. Like, he doesn't have the right. He doesn't have the ability to just like, create legislation out of thin air. Right. He is very much a counselor. I was trying to look up the history of czars. Right. It is weird. Have we always had czars? I know there was the whole thing about border czar. Czar was Bernard Baruch, appointed by President Woodrow Wilson to head the War Industries Board in 1918. The press dubbed him the industry czar because he had sweeping powers to coordinate wartime production. During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed several czars to manage the massive wartime economy, including a shipping czar and a synthetic rubber czar. These roles were. Synthetic rubber czar, one of the most iconic people are stoked for that. People don't talk about the need for our ongoing need for synthetic rubber czar. No. These roles were essential because existing government bureaucracies were too slow to handle the urgent demands of total war during the Nixon era. The modern concept of the czar, a policy specialist with a specific portfolio, solidified under Nixon. During the 1973 oil crisis, Nixon appointed William Simon as the energy czar to manage fuel shortages. He also had a drug czar during the sort of like, beginnings of the war on drugs. So anyways, again, I think unless you're just blanket against these industries. It's hard to argue that you want somebody that doesn't have any expertise in said industries. Yeah, some of these claims. Here's one. It's sort of hard to.

No one's using the web apps that. Are using the mobile web. I don't know. I wouldn't read too much into this data specifically. I would much more look at, like, what are the structural advantages that we know exist? And I mean, with Gemini, one of them is to that point, about the wire cutter. You know, where the wire cutter shows up Google search results. You know what company has one bot for scraping everything? Google. So the Google bot identifies as one entity. So you can either say, I'm allowing Google or not. And it's a big. It's a tall order to be like, yeah, I don't want to be in Google results. And so you. A lot of companies are saying, yeah, I'm good with Google showing up in Google results, but that also shows up in AI search results. And they can. And there are things that companies can do to say, hey, don't put me in the Gemini training data set necessarily. But in terms of just actually showing up, you've seen it in the Google. In the Gemini app, it says using Google search. And so if I go to Gemini and I say, hey, head over to the wire cutter, find me the best vacuum cleaner. Google probably can do that. Testing it, right? Probably do that. Yeah. Test it. Whereas OpenAI is in a fight with the New York Times. Whereas Google and the New York Times, they might not love each other, but they definitely have an uncomfortable truce. Right? A funny Gemini integration that I've used is that you land in a hat.

App downloads are catching up to ChatGPT and Gemini users now spend more time in the app than ChatGPT users. People are going back and forth on can Gemini catch up. You know, the model clearly very good. The big bombshell in the semi analysis piece over the weekend was this idea, which I think has been bandied about before. This idea that OpenAI has not done a proper pre train since 4o and the 4.5pre train kind of got mothballed and so. But there was this question about like, is pre training dead? Seems like the Google folks said, no, it's not. And then they went and did a Pre train and Gemini 3 outperformed anthropic also pre trained. Yeah, I mean, yeah. I mean we asked Sholto about this, he said, oh yeah, we're still bullish on scaling. Yeah. And he, I think actually like Sholto kind of like in the subtext said, like, the reason Opus 4.5 was good is not because it was a new pre chain, it's because it was rl. That's what I mean. That was your reading. Yeah. I feel like there's still juice in the lemon of pre training, but it's not scale. Like we only have one Internet. Ilya was correct about that. It's not scaling the size of the pre train, which is what happened with 4.5from GPT 4.5. That was just bigger, I guess. But it does seem like there's little optimizations that you can do on the pre training side. But I don't know, we'll have to dig into it. But I think the thing that no one is debating is the fact that the Gemini 3 as a model with Nanobanana Pro with VO3 is just like the actual foundational intelligence is plenty good to be dominant in the consumer AI category. The question is, can you actually get people to install the app, use it, can they enjoy it? Do they not churn and go back to ChatGPT? I've been fighting back and forth left and right going into one app and the other. I was getting a ton of disconnects errors with the Gemini app. Even though the model's great and there's some really cool features. Yeah, they need to catch up on the product side. Exactly. Yeah, yeah, the product side. And so a lot of people are saying, like, oh, Gemini team should just. The app team should just go and, you know, copy ChatGPT's homework and, you know, copy all these little features. I put out a post that the folks over at the Gemini team actually, you know, did turn into bug reports and I think are working on. But it really does seem like it's, it's, it's a really, it's a sprint to actually create an app that is as sticky as ChatGPT, because ChatGPT, the app is fantastic and very, very well designed. And so, yeah, and there's some reporting. From similar web is what the FT is.

America in the 1940s, 50s and 60s. I completely agree. Want your takes on a couple things. Housing affordability. I think a lot of people agree right now that housing affordability is sort of like upstream of a lot of the problems that we're facing as a country. What's your current stance on how we can improve affordability at the local level and at the federal level? I'm a yimby, I'm an abundance guy on housing. We got to build far more housing in California. You know, I don't endorse people or sort of zero housing people in my district we got to realize that aesthetics matter, but economic equality of opportunity matters more. And you can't have $5 trillion companies in my district and expect to live like where the valley of the hearts delight. Like if you got that many companies, you got to have housing near transit and dense housing to make sure that people can live there and that it's not just a place where wealthy people can live and that the working and middle class is getting shafted. We also need to stop private equity from buying up single family homes. People say, oh, this is a red herring. No, it's not a red herring. In some places they have bought up too much single family homes. So pro building, pro streamlining, making it easier to build and having zoning reform and stop private equity from buying up these single family homes. What about international? Will we make progress at least in California on those issues in the next 10 years? Yes, because I think people realize we didn't make enough progress over the last 10 years, that this is a failure of California policy. And whoever is elected the next governor, I can't imagine it won't be on a abundance agenda when it comes to housing. And it's not going to be okay, let me do it at the last year, try to do something of an eight year term. It's going to be day one. How do we start to do things that it's going to build more housing. So I think it's been a wake up call for California. That makes sense. Any quick comments on the current state versus federal.

Is there anything good or maybe risky that you found going out there? What were your takeaways? Three takeaways. 1. 1/3 of the AI talent is in China. What does that mean? That means it would be totally counterproductive to ban Chinese students from coming to the United States or Chinese entrepreneurs for coming to the United States. We want to have that talent come to the United States because we still have a better talent ecosystem for capital and for investment. Second, we need to make sure that we're developing the talent in, in. In AI here in the United States and investing in STEM and making sure that we're encouraging the, the local development of that. But third, and this is the most important, important guess how much youth unemployment is in China. It's like nearly 20%. It's really high. You guys are too smart on this stuff. It's really. That's crazy. How is that possible? I feel like, can't they just go build more bridges and create more jobs? I thought, I thought it was a command and control economy. I don't know. It's always. They have enough to empty sky rises. I think maybe. I don't know. Yeah. What was your takeaway from it? As I describe it to people, you can't build dating apps in China. Right. Like, so, you know, the people who have these. Is it banned? Yeah, I mean, it's such a directed economy. They want everyone to like, make stuff, manufacture stuff, not do things that they would consider frivolous. Sure, sure. Sports app, a music app, all the cultural stuff that we do that improves consumer life or thinks about consumer needs. And, you know, so you're someone who gets this fancy education in college and then they're like, okay, go work at a factory. And just like, we've undervalued people who want to work at factories in America. We should be having more trade schools and more respect for factory workers. They've undervalued people who don't want to work at a factory. And the reality is, like, you should have both choices. So these people, they, they, they're there and they don't want to go necessarily to build a bridge or necessarily to build the next factory of robotics. And the. It was hilarious because I would talk to the Premier, Li Chang or others and they'd say, well, it's a voluntary unemployment problem. These are just folks they should be getting doing these jobs. But what if in America we said, okay, you know, is one of the newsrooms, when they were being laid off, said to someone, go become an electrician? Well, that's as offensive as telling a steel worker to become a coder. Like, you know, people do things and they want to do what they aspire to do. And China is a command directed economy that is overvalued. Manufacturing doesn't have that diversity we do. Our problem has been the opposite, that we undervalued making things, we undervalued the trades. And so what we need is sort of a balance for America to have manufacturing, but also this incredible ecosystem of the service economy which can employ people where China can't. And that's ultimately why I bet on America. I'm also one pointer sick of this argument that let's just go be like China where they're going to eat our lunch. Really? You know, the Chinese model is crony communism. Like okay, gping gets rich and a bunch of people who are running these companies get rich and the rest. And then you have 20% unemployment and you have consumer welfare declining. And look at how most people live. They don't live in nice houses with two cars. So I don't want China as a model and I'm not going to compromise every American having economic security just because we're chasing China. China is not the model. America needs to be more like America of how we built America in the 1940s, 50s. I completely agree. Want your takes on a couple things. Housing, affordable.

To workers and capability. Okay, but so let's make it more specific because I agree at a high level with a lot of that. But let's talk about a specific role or job like truck driving. You've generally come out against or have concerns around AI based job displacement with long haul trucking and truck drivers. On the other side of that, if I'm a, if I'm running a trucking company and I want to deliver the best possible service for my customers, it's possible that AI would be able to support that. How, how, what, what kind of like policy do you think is right in order to create? You want some guardrails around, around the industry, how AI should be used in trucking? I'd love to understand more. Yeah, I would say have a human in the loop. And so what does that mean when I on a plane? A lot of it is automated, but we still have a pilot there. And I'm glad we have a pilot. I wouldn't want to just fly in an automated plane. And so does this mean that a truck driver's job may become more appealing? Because right now, as you know, we have a shortage actually of truck drivers. More demand. But if they have a assist from a technology that maybe allows them to rest more, that's less taxing. They're there for the edge cases if something is possibly going wrong. They're there to deal with maintenance. They're there to make sure that you have loading and unloading happening. We can reimagine what the role of a truck driver is going to be. And we can certainly have a temporary view that for the next five years that you should have the driver there. Now that doesn't mean that at some point there may not be jobs or certain parts of things that don't require a driver. But it doesn't seem unreasonable for five years to say you want a driver in the loop. And let's rethink the types of jobs that that will be. And if we need the government to be helping invest in these, in the developing of this technology, fine. But do it in a way that's going to be complementary with drivers. Yeah, this is kind of happening already with Waymo, where there is a human in the loop. And it's. But you know, the ratio of tele operators to cars on the road is potentially higher than one to one right now, you know, according to some reports. But over time, I think the Waymo team expects there to be fewer and fewer humans in the loop over time. The question is, how fast does that happen? And you're sort of proposing maybe try and make that as gradual as a process as possible. Because I mean, you go back to like the elevator operator used to be a human, now we use buttons. And no one's really missing those jobs they phased out over time. I think the main thing is everyone is concerned about rapid job displacement. Not necessarily the, if I told you your grandson can't, can't be a truck driver, you'd say, oh, you know, he'll find a different job. But if it's like every truck driver out of the job next year, that's obviously much more disengaging to the US Economy. Is that how you think about it in terms of just timelines more than strict rules forever? I think that's thoughtful. There's a famous economist who once said in a gender time, jobs for the father, not for the son. And by that means he meant, look, we've got to make sure that people in their 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s have jobs. That doesn't mean that that's exactly what their kids are going to do or their grandkids are going to do. For a lot of these human in the loop legislation, we're talking about five years, we're not talking about 15 years. And we're talking about roles evolving, right? I mean, it may be that these evolve and then there's less of a need to hire folks down the line. And you, you have a natural transition of folks, but you're taking people who are workers and making sure that they're productive and they have a good life. Let me explain why I think this matters. Phone operators, which people often give an example, and Alex Alexis, who's at Chicago, had a great point about this. That was 2% of the workforce. Commercial drivers are 10% of the workforce. You already have an anger in the country of so many people displaced by globalization, displaced by the concentration of wealth in some areas, and you really want to throw into this mix of rapid mass job loss, displacement, and then what? Just compensate them and have people stay at home and just get a check? Like, is that the society that we think is going to be productive or do we rather figure out how they have some role and some say and the transition be managed in a way that is, that considers their interests as well. And that's, you know, and I get that it's a good natured debate and people say, okay, kind of you're adding some cost to the issue. And if all you cared about was shareholder profits and minimizing consumer costs as your only holy grail, and you didn't care about jobs and you didn't care about communities, then people have a legitimate critique of me. But I would argue that that was the mentality during globalization, and it's what's led to so much of the polarization, not just of our politics in the United States, but in the Western world led to things like Brexit, led to anti immigrant sentiment. And maybe we should consider jobs and communities not as dispositive, but as a factor, just like we consider consumer costs and shareholder profits. Yeah. What's your look back on how the Uber story played out? Because.

Were shafted by a justice system that didn't work. And there are a lot of rich and powerful people who got away with it. But look, what I tell people is that AI is going to matter even more than anything. And to your point about Apple, it's not AI literally as just AI as Grok or ChatGPT or a technology that detects patterns and can predict the future based on patterns. It's more that AI has become a symbol for a technology revolution that people know is changing everything about their way of life and the economy and where they feel like they don't have control, that they don't have a full say in what that's going to mean. They don't have a full say in what that's going to mean for their kids in terms of having good paying jobs. And they're unsure if their kids are going to have as good a life as their parents had. They don't know what that's going to mean culturally for them as citizens and are they going to have the same sense or they're just going to be manipulated by algorithms and they don't know what that means culturally as their kids are on phones in school and becoming sort of creatures with machines. And so this whole concept of how technology is going to be something that empowers people and that people feel comfortable about as opposed to fearful of, is the challenge in my view for Time. And you know, I've gotten attacked from some people in Silicon Valley saying, oh, it's kind of a Luddite. And I was like, no, I'm not a Luddite. Of course I believe AI can do a lot of great things in medicine in coming up with new disease and lowering costs. But I don't think we can be oblivious to people's concerns about keeping jobs and keeping is social cohesion and making sure their kids are going to have a good economic future. And so I've tried to be thoughtful about how we adopt AI, how we adopt technology in a way that keeps the American dream alive and benefits folks. And I mean that's such a wide remit how we adopt AI technology because you can see it implemented from a chatbot that.

There is a wide range and that's what we sort of tried to state in the article, right? Performance is a wide range. Can you explain more about Google and Broadcom's relationship? Max Hodak from Neuralink and Science was asking on the timeline last week, why have Broadcom as a middleman, couldn't Google do the design and place the orders from TSMC themselves? But what's your read on that relationship and how, how durable it is? Yeah, so when you think about chip design, there's a few different stages, right? There's defining the architecture and then there's actually like implementing that architecture onto a process technology. There's laying out that architecture into gates on the chip and then there's like the whole supply chain side of things, right? Negotiating contracts, getting allocations, etc. That takes like 18 months, right? Isn't that like an 18 month process? Basically, yeah, 18 months or more. Right. I would say, I would say actually like Nvidia is faster side and Google's on the slower side just because, you know, Nvidia has been doing it for longer. They have a bigger team, right? And they, you know, but at the same time, intel has the biggest chip design team and they move even slower than that, right? They take like four years at least. That's what they did a year or two ago. We'll see what the new CEO can get into the, you know, you know, reorgan. Right. But as far as like Google, you know, when they first started the tpu, it was a very few people and they relied heavily, heavily, heavily on Broadcom to do everything right. They just defined the top level architecture and Broadcom did everything I said below, right? Negotiating with supply chain, figuring out process, figuring out how to lay out the gates, everything, right. As time has moved forward, Google has taken on more and more of this right now. They use, you know, they've talked a lot about alpha chip where they use AI to help floor plan the chip, right. Once you have the architecture, how do I physically lay it out onto the chip? Right. They've done more and more and more there. They haven't taken over everything yet, but that's, that's sort of the point. But Google, Broadcom has this like super big advantage, right? Nvidia, they acquired Mellanox, you know, call it five, six, seven years ago. Huge acquisition. Who's the biggest networking company in the world? Broadcom. Right. Broadcom is the biggest networking company in the world. And you know, when you talk about AI, it's, it's the AI, it's the architecture of the actual processing elements. It's memory which you're buying from, you know, you know, the memory companies, right? Hynix and Samsung and Micron and then it's networking, right? When you try and boil it down to the most simple things in software, right, the networking side of things is so important and the, let's say technical competence of everyone around the world besides Broadcom and Nvidia and networking is so low, or rather it's just not as good as them. They're actually good, but it's like Broadcom and Nvidia are just so good and Broadcom is better than Nvidia in many ways at networking that, you know, when you think about what is Google doing, yes, they're defining how the network topology is, but when you're talking about the physical network surdes, you know, how packets get transferred, all these different things. Broadcom has heavy, heavy influence there. So to this day, right, Broadcom is still charging margins like they did three, four years ago, even though Google has taken up more and more of the work. But at the same time, Google can't leave until they figure out how to do that networking and supply chain themselves or with a partner. And so what are they doing on tpuva that is potentially a distraction that's slowing down their execution is they're working with MediaTek, right? MediaTek at times has helped Cisco with their network chips. MediaTek has a lot of work on some of this networking stuff. They're nowhere close to Broadcom, right. On revenue, right? For, and that's, that's, that's one metric on technical competence, you know, that's another metric. I think MediaTek is good, right? But like they're just nowhere close to Broadcom. So now Google is having to work with, I don't want to say subpar vendors, but inferior vendors to Broadcom. And that's just to increase their margin on TPU8. I would even say their angle when they started this project was never we're going to sell TPUs externally it was, dude, we're paying, you know, a 3x markup to Broadcom and half the cost of this chip is memory. Like what the fuck are we doing right? You know, at the same time it's like, well, sure, physically the cost for the networking is not that much, but, but what value does the networking bring is, you know, sort of Broadcom. And then Broadcom's also doing the like game theory, not science of like, well, you can't really leave us so we're going to charge you what we think is fair or what we think we can charge. And Google's like, oh, no, we're stuck to you. Right? So MediaTek is taking way, way, way less margin. They're not passing the memory through them, right? And so, you know, this. This ends up being like, hey, that's a huge advantage for them. Flip side is like, well, they've got to engineer all this work that Broadcom was doing. Instead of working on a way better architecture, they've got to work with a worse vendor. Right? Objectively worse. Although MediaTek, like I said, is very good to try and implement TPUs more directly with TSMC with less Broadcom sort of in the middle. Very helpful. And Google, you know, because it's risky, is going down both paths, right? They're continuing to work with Broadcom on TPV8 and then separate TPV8 project. They're working with MediaTek, right, because they can't risk, you know, find whatever 30 points of margin, 40 points of margin, 50 points of margin. I can't risk the TPU being late because ADS runs on that, Gemini runs on that. Yeah. Can you give any takes on Nvidia's $2 billion investment in Synopsys? That.

Well done, well done. So give me an example of a life skill that you can learn with your app. Yeah I guess like entrepreneurship especially startups and stuff because like in Australia I don't know about in the US but school is very entry level. It's not hands on. I feel like it's very just not preparing us for life. Like you do need it if you want to be a doctor or a lawyer or something but some kids don't want to do that and like yes you do have commerce and computer science and stuff which I am doing as electives but they're not hands on and they're very like outdated and like textbook heavy. So I feel like actually learning life skills that you can apply now especially like with AI and everything like if you don't know how to use AI now you sort of going to be left behind. Very exciting. What are you hoping to get out of your trip? You're on summer holiday right now.

5, 4, 3, 2, 1. You're watching. TVPN. Today's Monday, December 1, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultradome, the Temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Ramp time is money save. Both easy use, corporate cards, bill payments, accounting and a whole lot more all in one place. We have a special guest, special guest today, opening the show with us, Alby from the land down under, please. Probably saw him go viral recently, but why don't you introduce yourself? Yeah, so I just. I actually arrived in LA on Saturday. Welcome. Yeah, I'm from Sydney or Wollongong, so about an hour and a half from Sydney. And yeah, I've been building something called Finkel, which is basically duolingo for life skills. And I just applied to YC as well with that post on X. How many views did you get on the application video? I think it got like 7.8 million. So, yeah, let's. Hit the gong. Pretty viral for Albie. Well done. Well done. So give me an example of a life skill that you can learn.

You're watching TVPN today's Monday, December 1, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultradome, the Temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Ramp time is money save. Both easy use, corporate cards, bill payments, accounting and a whole lot more all in one place. We have a special guest, special guest. Today, opening the show with us, Alby from the land down under, please. Probably saw him go viral recently, but why don't you introduce yourself? Yeah, so I just, I actually arrived in LA on Saturday. Welcome. Yeah, I'm from Sydney or Wollongong, so about an hour and a half from Sydney. And yeah, I've been building something called Finkel which is basically duolingo for life skills. And I just applied to YC as well with that post on X. How many views did you get on the application video? I think it got like 7.8 million. So yeah, pretty viral for Albie. Well done, well done. So give me an example of a life skill that you can learn with your app. Yeah, I guess like entrepreneurship, especially startups and stuff because like in Australia, I don't know about in the US but school is very entry level. It's not hands on. I feel like it's very just not preparing us for life. Like you do need it if you want to be a doctor or a lawyer or something. But some kids don't want to do that. And like yes, you do have commerce and computer science and stuff which I am doing as electives, but they're not hands on and they're very like outdated and like textbook heavy. So I feel like actually learning life skills that can, that you can apply now. Especially like with AI and everything, like if you don't know how to use AI now, you sort of gonna be left behind. So very exciting. What are you hoping to get out of your trip? You're on summer holiday right now. Oh yeah, well like my exams just finished before I came so there's still like two weeks left of school. But how do you think you did? I think I got like a B in science and like there you go, there you go, a B in math. Focus on the game, focus on the game. I really need room to grow. But yeah, I guess what I'm trying to get out of it is just to like meet as many people as possible, make as many connections as possible because this trip probably won't, a trip like this probably won't happen again for a while. So yeah, that's sort of my goal. What's the status of the YC application. You've submitted it? Yeah. Have you heard back yet? No, it hasn't. Okay. Still, like I'll need to. Yeah, we can, we got, we got a lot. Your YC alum watching this. Please go leave a recommendation. Yeah, but congratulations. Thanks so much for coming by. What is the stage of development of the actual application? The product itself. Are you live? Can people go download demo? Right now we're getting like beta testers, but the beta should be launching soon, probably by the end of this year. Do you have a wait list? Are you doing email capture yet? Yeah, like whitelist beta testers. We've got a couple hundred, but yeah. Very cool. Incredible. Well, congratulations on all the attention. I'm sure you'll convert it into a lot of opportunity and have a great trip. Yes. Great to have you by this and good luck with the YC application. Thanks so much. Looking sharp in the suit. Looking sharp in the suit. Amazing. Have a good rest. Thanks for stopping by. Before we move on to the rest of the show, let me tell you about Restream 1 livestream. 30 plus destinations. If you want to multi stream, go to Restream TV Calm and it's been three years since Chat GPT launched. I wanted to reflect a little bit. Everything changed or maybe nothing changed or maybe some amount of change in between everything and nothing. You're more on the nothing changed camp. I sort of agree with you. I was sort of. I was sort of reflecting on like, okay, Thanksgiving's happened. It was Thanksgiving over the weekend. You know, how different is my world? Like, there's not a humanoid robot that's cooking for. And also, even if we had a humanoid robot, I think Thanksgiving would be the day we let the robot sit in the closet. Because we enjoy. No, no, let us cook. We enjoy cooking. Cooking is a fun family experience. And so of all the things. Let us cook. Thanksgiving is like the track day of cooking. Like, even if you have the robot that does it, you still want to do it on Thanksgiving. You don't want to cook on a random Tuesday when you're busy, you got lunch, you know, all this other stuff. Thanksgiving is the Nurburgring. And I was doing some dishes after Thanksgiving and I felt like it was a good way to kind of like, it felt like walking off the pie in a little. It wasn't walking very far, kind of back and forth. And so, yeah, so that, that, that hasn't really changed that much for me. I was thinking I was reflecting more on the agent commerce thing. It feels like chatgpt and OpenAI they really are pushing to make revenue from agentic commerce, like before in this holiday season. And incredible speed of execution. Like, clearly it's a big opportunity if you can figure out how to, you know, run ads, commerce, convert, take a cut of that. That's big. My experience actually demoing it, it was kind of interesting. Like, the actual product in ChatGPT is pretty good, but you can see that the walled gardens are already going up. So one place that I like to go to for reviews of products specifically around the holidays is the Wirecutter. Now, the Wirecutter, their whole twist was they wouldn't rate each product, which, what they would do is they would pick a category and then they would just tell you what their best product was in that category. Sort of like a cluster max of vacuums. So they would give you the platinum tier vacuum and then a budget pick. And so I've always liked the wirecutter. I think they do a very rigorous job. They were acquired by the New York Times. The New York Times is currently in a lawsuit with OpenAI. And so if you go to ChatGPT. And say, hey, and I think they're about to be in a lawsuit with. David Sacks, maybe, maybe. Which we will talk about on the show in a little bit. But if, but, but, but if you go. So I went to ChatGPT and I was like, hey, okay, pull a deep research report. Just pull everything from the wire cutter and, and tell me every category and every product that's top ranked. Because then I can just scan it really quickly and be like, oh, yeah, I didn't even remember that that category existed. That would be a great gift. I'll get it. And I'll go through the. I'll go through the wirecutter link. I'm fine with that. I'm paying ChatGPT. I'm happy to go and use their affiliate link on the wirecutter. That's how the wirecutter monetizes. But it couldn't do it. It couldn't do it. It said, hey, we don't. We can't touch the wire cutter. Like, it's off limits. You got to head over there yourself, pop open a Chrome tab, brother, if you want to get over there, like, that's on you. Or maybe an Atlas tab, I don't know. But so, so, so that, that had not really changed that much for me. But the one thing that did really change on Thanksgiving was the discourse, like the AI narrative has fully arrived to just family and friends. You mean family in the home? Yes, yes, in people that don't work in technology that don't, their job is. Not showing off their favorite trough. Not that more talking about. Is it a bubble? Where do you think all this stuff goes? The stuff that we've been talking about? I'm sure you're not living in a bubble. You think the average family in America is a bubble? I saw multiple newsletters where the whole conceit of the newsletter going into the holidays was how to talk to your family about the AI bubble and how to talk to your family about AI generally. And I think it's real because if you've been watching your 401k over the last year, you've seen a massive spike and then a recent sell off. And if you've turned on any news or opened up any newspaper, you've been hearing about $1 trillion and you're like, what? A trillion dollars? That ChatGPT app, they need a trillion dollars to make that thing work. Chat. Right, chat. And so it is a really big narrative. And so I wanted to reflect on what has actually changed over the last three years. Three years and specifically in the Mag 7. The Mag 7 has been on absolute tear. Just over the last three years. The value as a whole has basically tripled. It was a little under $8 trillion. Now it's over $21 trillion. It's a lot of value created in the last three years. Nvidia was second to last in the max in the mag 7. When ChatGPT launched, it was worth just $420 billion. Something on there today. The stock is up over 10 for $4.36 trillion. And up today, and up today. Despite all the chaos, Dylan Patel was. Trying so hard to bring that stock down, but he couldn't do it. He's coming on the show at noon. We're going to confront him about his bear posting and whether or not the market is funny enough. Broadcom is down today. Okay, why is that? The maker of the tpu. Oh yeah. I mean a lot of these things, it's like it's already been priced in. I mean even when you read that semi analysis piece, you know, a lot of it's like we've been writing about this for months. People have already put this trade on, et cetera, et cetera. But I do think that the, The Nvidia, the 10X that's happened has really created some crazy zealots and just an entire industrial complex because there are so many people who put, who heard AI. They tried the ChatGPT thing and they were like, this is big. How do I get it on this? I can't buy OpenAI. OpenAI is running away with it. Oh, they need Nvidia chips. That's the logical next step. They went in Nvidia and they got a 10x and they could have gotten a 10x on like $1 million. $10 million. Like there's no amount of money because it was, it was already a $420 billion company. So you could be, you could put your entire retirement savings in it, no problem. Complete liquidity. Right. It's not, oh, you got to get some spv. It was really easy. Siki Chen from Runway was saying that back. I think it was 20, 20, 2021. He, he said he put an uncomfortable amount of his net worth into Nvidia. And obviously and near Cyan. Same story, right? Still underappreciated the Nvidia 10 year fund. All it does is buy Nvidia just by investing in it. You can't possibly sell God's chosen company. Yes, that's what the, I think title. Of the fund was. Oh, really? Yeah. That's hilarious. And so, I mean, yeah, there's been a ton of zealots. We're going to talk to Dylan Patel at noon about some of the zealots that have been attacking him previously. The world's largest company in November of 2022 was Apple. And at the time they had a sizable lead over Microsoft, Amazon and Google. Now that gap has closed a bit as the hyperscalers have grown more over the last three years on the back of the AI boom. And it's interesting, I mean, you can sort the mag7 by market cap and today you get the following ranking. Tesla, then Meta, then Amazon, Microsoft Alphabet, Apple, and then Nvidia at the top. And the big question, I think that's on everyone's mind and kind of underpins the horse race that we cover every day on the show is what will that ranking look like in the next three years? Is Nvidia really a monopoly? Is it impervious to attacks from the, from, you know, different suppliers? What does Broadcom have to do to get into the Mag 7? I don't know. Tesla's sitting at 10 on the market cap companiesmarketcap.com, which we're not affiliated with, which is just a fantastic website. Broadcom is sitting at number six above Meta currently. I don't know. I mean, I think, you know, several years in the one trillion dollar club, like just being, you know, undeniable at that scale. There's Also just like a bit of branding, like some of the companies that made it into the Mag 7 were, were. I feel like the Mag 7 leaned understandable, like not that deep in the supply chain. Even Nvidia was the deepest. Nvidia had the least of like a consumer brand. But still a lot of people used the gaming, graphic, gaming, graphics cards. Broadcom is really tricky because there's no consumer angle whatsoever. Consumers can buy Tesla, they can use Meta products, they can buy on Amazon, have a Microsoft operating system, they can use Google, they can have an iPhone and they can have an Nvidia gaming graphics card. The top Tesla sitting at 10 TSMC at 98 is Saudi Aramco 7 Metta and then 6. I also think you have to be an American company to be in this like mag 7 or whatever the hot ranking is. Like Fang Fang did not include, never included oil companies, never included international companies. Because if you go there then you could be like, oh well let's include like the Chinese tobacco company that's worth $1 trillion or something like that. Like there are some crazy, there are some crazy like foreign owned companies that are, if they were independent, might be worth a TR because they just have so much of True Monopoly. Yeah, exactly. But it doesn't really count because it's just sitting there out in the ether. Well, let me tell you about Gemini 3 Pro. Google's most intelligent model yet. State of the art reasoning, next level vibe coding and deep multimodal understanding. And speaking of that Buco Capital bloke as opposed here, Gemini app downloads are catching up to ChatGPT and Gemini users now spend more time in the app than ChatGPT users. People are going back and forth on can Gemini catch up. You know the model clearly very good. The big bombshell in the semianalysis piece over the weekend was this idea which I think has been bandied about before, this idea that OpenAI has not done a proper pre train since 4.0 and the 4.5pre train kind of got mothballed and so but there was this question about like is pre training dead? Seems like the Google folks said no it's not. And then they went and did a Pre train and Gemini 3 outperformed anthropic also pre trained. I mean, yeah, pre trained pilled. I mean we asked Sholto about this, he said oh yeah, we're still bullish on scaling. Yeah, I think actually like Sholto kind of like in the subtext said like the reason opus 4. 5 was good is not because it. Was a new pre chain, it's because it was rl. That's what I read. That was your reading. Yeah. I feel like there's still juice in the lemon of pre training, but it's not scale. Like we only have one Internet. Ilya was correct about that. It's not scaling the size of the pre train, which is what happened with 4.5from. From GPT 4.5. That was just bigger, I guess. But. But does seem like there's little optimizations that you can do on the. On the pre training side. But I don't know. We'll have to dig into it. But. But I think the thing that no one is debating is the fact that the Gemini 3 as a model with Nano Banana Pro with VO3 is just like the actual foundational intelligence is plenty good to be dominant in the consumer AI category. The question is, can you actually get people to install the app, use it, can they enjoy it? Do they not churn and go back to ChatGPT? I've been fighting back and forth left and right going into one app and the other. I was getting a ton of disconnects errors with the Gemini app. Even though the model is great and there's some really cool features. Yeah, they need to catch up on the product side. Exactly. Yeah. Yeah, the product side. And so a lot of people are saying like, oh, Gemini team should just. The app team should just go and, you know, copy ChatGPT homework and. And you know, copy all these little features. I've put out a post that the folks over at the Gemini team actually, you know, did turn into bug reports and I think are working on. But it really does seem like it's. It's a really. It's a sprint to actually create an app that is as sticky as ChatGPT because ChatGPT, the app is fantastic and very, very well designed. And so. Yeah. And there's some reporting from similar web is what the FT is using to track average user minutes. I always find those hard to. I mean it must be like Nielsen ratings where they're like polling people or something because. Yeah. And I don't know, you can't get. A pixel in OpenAI like you can't get a pixel into the Gemini app. Are they counting user minutes if a tab is open? But I'm not actually. And is this just desktop? Because that's like completely separate from mobile. Use desktop and mobile web, which again, I don't. No one's using mobile web. I don't know. I wouldn't read too many, too much into this data specifically. I would much more look at like what are the structural advantages that we know exist? And I mean with Gemini, one of them is to that point about the wire cutter. You know, you know where the wire cutter shows up Google search results. You know what, you know what company has one bottom for scraping everything? Google. So the Google bot is identifies as one entity. So you can either say I'm allowing Google or not. And it's a big, it's a tall order to be like, yeah, I don't want to be in Google results. And so a lot of companies are saying, yeah, I'm good with Google showing up in Google results, but that also shows up in AI search results. And there are things that companies can do to say, hey, don't put me in the Gemini training data set necessarily. But in terms of just actually showing up, you've seen it in the Gemini app, it says using Google search. And so if I go to Gemini and I say, hey, head over to the wire cutter, find me the best vacuum cleaner, Google probably can do that. Gemini probably do it. Yeah. Test it. Whereas OpenAI is in a fight with the New York Times. Whereas Google and the New York Times, they might not love each other, but they definitely have an uncomfortable truce. Right. A funny Gemini integration that I've used is that you've land in a, in a hangout and you just say, who is this? Is this real? You can actually do that? It is, it pulls up a sidebar. You can just ask like, who, who am I meeting with right now? And it'll give you like a, it's. Clearly who am I meeting with? What should I say? What should I say to them? Should I ask them what is my name? What are, what do they want to know about me? What should I tell them about me? Okay, so Gemini was able to pull Wirecutter recommendations. Yeah, I don't know. This is interesting. I feel like, I wonder if Wirecutter is actually benefiting from this in any way yet I'm assuming that Google hasn't. Gemini hasn't rolled out the agentic commerce stuff that would actually scrape out the referral, the referral token. And so if I'm in Gemini and I'm saying I'm going to do some agentic shopping or whatever and I say, pull me the best vacuum cleaner from the wire cutter. It goes over and does that and then I land on the wire cutter and then I click that link, that should give the wire cutter the credit. Now if I as a follow up prompt go in Gemini and say, okay, great, the wire Cutter told me the best vacuum cleaner is from James Dyson, of course. Is it Dyson? Find me the Amazon link. Well, Gemini's probably not given the wire cutter the attribution at that point. It might even be taking its own attribution. I don't know exactly how it's. How it's functioning right now, but I would imagine that that link does not get reinstantiated as the. As the Wirecutter affiliate link. And so we could see. I mean, these are all, like, going to be pretty existential questions for the SEO crowd. Anyone who's monetizing off of SEO. We saw some. Some screenshot that apparently site traffic to Vox properties is down 50%. And I don't know if how much. How much of that is just the shift to social media versus the shift to. Yeah, how much is it their business strategy just being like, hey, we want to do more video. Yeah. And that'll be distributed off our site. For the most part. I think a lot of people generally do not. They consume more and more content on social media platforms. They go from YouTube to their RSS player to audiobooks to Twitter to Instagram, and they kind of bounce around from one and the other. And then every once in a while, they will go in and actually land on a particular site. Like you can. If you go to tbpn.com, you can get our newsletter in your inbox every morning. And you can also sign up for Cognition. They're the makers of Devon, the AI software engineer. Crush your backlog with your personal AI engineering team. Well, speaking of the New York Times, David Sacks is going to war with the New York Times. He says, inside the NYT's hoax factory. He calls it a hoax factory because the New York Times posted a piece about David Sacks saying that the headline was, Silicon Valley's man in the White House is benefiting himself and his friends. And Ryan Mack was going back and forth with Sean McGuire or. Yeah, Sean McGuire. Ryan Max says today has been a good example of what X has become. Complaints from a subset of wealthy tech folks about a story that circulates more widely than the actual story itself. Musk bought the platform to control the message, and he and his friends are getting just that. And Sean McGuire says, you don't get to run this headline, then write an article that doesn't validate the claim, and then get away with playing the victim. We see the. We see through the ruse. And so David Sacks has responded in full to the NYT's hoax factory. He says five months ago, the five New York Times reporters were dispatched to create a story about my supposed conflicts of interest working as the White House AI and crypto czar. Through a series of fact checks, they revealed their accusations, which we debunked in detail. Not surprisingly, the published article included only bits and pieces of our responses. Their accusations ranged from from a fabricated dinner with a leading tech CEO to non existent promises of access to the President, to baseless claims of influencing defense contracts. Every time we would prove an accusation false, NYT pivoted to the next allegation. This is why the story has dragged on for five months. Today they evidently just threw up their hands and published this nothing burger. Anyone who reads the story carefully can see that they strung together a bunch of anecdotes that don't support the headline. And of course, that was the whole point. At no point in their constant goalpost shifting was NYT willing to update the premise of their story to accept it. I have no conflicts of interest to uncover no conflicts of interest. As, as it became clear that NYT wasn't interested in writing a fair story, I hired the law firm Claire Locke, which specializes in defamation law. I'm attaching Claire Locke's letter to the NYT so readers have full context on our interactions with NYT reporters over the past several months. Once you read the letter, it becomes very clear how NYT willfully mis characterized or ignored the facts to support their bogus narrative. So Will says hiring Claire Locke for this is sick cruise missile to blow up a straw hut. He's a big fan of. Of litigation. He loves litigation. Well, people have been supportive of this broadly in tech. Let's go. Let's go through some of the reaction. Sam Altman says David Sachs really understands AI and cares about the US leading in innovation. I'm grateful we have him. Brian Armstrong. Yeah. Here'S my takeaway. If you believe that AI and crypto are industries that we should support in the United States, then you want to have a czar focused on those things that generally feels positively about those things and wants to create the best possible environment for those industries to thrive in the US I think that there's actually a debate on both fronts, right? Like there's people on the left that think AI and crypto are just default bad, they want less of them. And there's people on, there's people on the right that believe that too. But I think that ultimately there's arguments for why the US should lead in stablecoins, which is part of the, part of why the genius act is important. And a lot of, you know, the AI action plan, there's going to be debates on individual points in that. But in general, I think creating an environment in the US where we can continue to lead in AI is important. So I think there wasn't, I didn't see any sort of like, smoking gun in any of this stuff. There were some allegations around, around the. I don't think they smoke very much at all. I think it's mostly tequila drinking. That's true. All in tequila. Although, Although JCAL does tote a gun regularly. Oh, yeah. So maybe that's the smoking gun. He's a Texan. Yeah. No, I didn't see anything very specific. I mean, it's, it's, it's all in like, they're, they are super connected. If you partner with them in some ways, like you would expect to get more of a read on where they're spending time in dc, what they're seeing. That seems like there are clear lines on what you can share, like what, what turns you into a lobbying firm and what doesn't. I think they've stayed out of becoming a lobbying firm and so they have clear, clear rules on that. Yeah. I think Boz distilled it pretty well. Before we read his post. Let me tell you about adeo, the AI native CRM. ADEO builds scales and grows your company to the next level. Boss said, I don't know David Sacks, but I want more expertise in government. Experts tend to have made money in their area of expertise, in their area of expertise. If people can't have history or friends in a field before leading it, then our leaders won't know anything. And I thought this was a good distillation of like, the core debate about, like, should you have someone who has never participated in an industry overseeing it, or should you like someone who's purely academic, purely outside of it. And I believe there's some readers and probably people at the New York Times that would like somebody that hasn't participated in either industry to be running in a role like that and just blanket against both industries and sort of like hold them back. So the reaction is interesting in the comments. I mean, first the top comment is somebody beefing with Boz over how he ran the Quest Store. It's like, clearly a VR aficionado who has an axe to grind over niche VR policies. But the second post is what I want to get to because it actually addresses the core claim here. And Alex says the construct you're thinking of is called a council. It's Been used for a long time to allow the elected with limited knowledge on a domain to get a consensus of options from a range of experts. This minimizes conflicts and prevents kleptocracy. But like, isn't that what a czar is? I thought Sachs was a counsel. Like, he's not an elected official. Like, the elected official is Donald Trump, the president. And like, there's a variety of people, folks there and then. And then Sacks is like appointed to this czar role that is just to give his like, his, like he doesn't have the right. He doesn't have the ability to just like create legislation out of thin air. Right. He is very much a Calvinist. I was trying to look up the history of czars. Right. It is weird. Like, have we always had czars? I know there was a whole thing. About border czar czar was Bernard Barak, appointed by President Woodrow Wilson to head the War Industries Board in 1918. The press dubbed him the industry czar because he had sweeping powers to coordinate wartime production. During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed several czars to manage the massive wartime economy, including a shipping czar and a synthetic rubber czar. These roles were Synthetic rubber czar, one. Of the most iconic people stoked for that. People don't talk about the need for our ongoing need for synthetic rubber czar. No. These roles were essential because existing government bureaucracies were too slow to handle the urgent demands of total war during the Nixon era. The modern concept of the czar, a policy specialist with a specific portfolio, solidified under Nixon. During the 1973 oil crisis. Nixon appointed William Simon as the energy czar to manage fuel shortages. He also had a drug czar during the sort of like beginnings of the war on drugs. So anyways, again, I think unless you're just blanket against these industries, it's hard to argue that you want somebody that doesn't have any expertise in said industries. Yeah, some of these claims. Here's one. It's sort of hard to track. Like, so he says, free from those. This is from the New York Times from the actual article for the screenshot. Free of those restrictions, Mr. Sachs flew to the Middle east in May and struck a deal to send 500,000American AI chips, mostly from Nvidia, to the UAE, the United Arab Emirates. The large number alarmed some White House officials who feared that China, an ally of the Emirates, would gain access to the technology, these people said. But the deal was a win for Nvidia. Analysts estimated that it could make as much as 200 billion from the chip sales. And so like I. We've covered the debate around export controls and should Nvidia, where should Nvidia be able to sell things? But it's never been an open and shut case in my mind. It's never been like, oh, it's so obvious that the UAE is completely off the table. Yeah. I don't know. I mean, it was also just like painting the friendship between Sachs and Jensen as like something that felt wrong. Was. Yeah. Was a little bit rough considering it's the most valuable company in the world. Yeah. One of the most important AI companies. Potentially the most important AI company if you just go by weight in the. In various indexes. Yeah. I don't know. I mean, it's like, it's clear that he doesn't have Nvidia bags directly. Like, that's completely debunked. So you have to do these like 25 different steps to get to some sort of conflict. It's a lot of like, you know. I read this and I think, like, this is if you're. If you're the average New York Times subscriber. Yeah. This is probably that you were. They were probably like very excited by this story, right? Yeah, I mean, a lot of. I think a lot of people are definitely like, yeah. Just riled up by the all in podcast. Charlie in the chat says, all in pod about to be an all timer after this article. Do you think it's possible that David and Jason coordinated to get this hit piece done to grow all in even further? They said we're at such an insane stage. Oh, yeah, that was a crazy thing. Yeah. Jason said a bunch of. I mean, Jason made a lot of good arguments about this, but one thing was he was like, we would be smaller if we. What was it? He was like, he was like, we would be bigger if we didn't talk about politics. And that seems crazy to me. I feel like politics is like the ultimate TAM expander in the history of podcasting and media. Broadway. The audience for political content is like. 10 times, I would think so. I do believe that Jason loves talking about tack and I think He's. He's an OG. He's an OG. He'S said that multiple times. But I would be shocked if politics was not a tame expander for podcasts broadly. And then the other thing is that he said that they lost money on the all in events. I don't know how that's possible. Like, and those events, obviously they're big budgets, but I would imagine that the Sponsors and the ticket sales. They're not cheap tickets. Right. I would imagine that they'd be making money off that. I certainly hope so. I mean, they've been running this thing for five years. It's incredibly valuable in the ecosystem. They should be able to capture some value there. Maybe they set up their own data center to sort of manage. They're just underwater. Yeah. We decided to bring podcast production on Prem, and we ordered a lot of. We ordered 100,000 black, a lot of cat blue. Al really has us by the balls. It's rough. Martin Shkreli here says the Sacks piece illustrates the exact problem with the New York Times. Voters specifically want this type of person, not a bureaucrat who has never worked a real job. Lina Khan, Case Street. Yeah, that's it. So the issue and the reason I think this article was written is that New York Times subscribers specifically want this type of article. Mm, yeah. Yeah. Whiskey Titans going back and forth here. Did you miss the entire point of the article? This isn't a quote, we can't have businessmen in government. This is a. We can't have the government officials who host government summits and sell access to the President for $1 million via their podcast business. And Martin Shkreli says, I doubt it was Sachs who wanted to sell 1 million dollar passes. And whiskey Titan says, I agree with you. I'm sure it wasn't, but letting Jason run rampant until Susie Wiles steps in isn't a great look. I happen to think Sachs is doing fine at this particular role, but I also understand the general public feelings, like there's a lot of graft. The New York Times isn't the right conduit for that argument, though, and they're going back and forth. The timeline truly is in turmoil over this. Dan Primack had a good take. He had a whole breakdown of this, which I think was interesting. He said, let's kick this off. But first let me tell you about fall. Build and deploy AI video and image models. They're trusted by millions to power generative media at scale. So Dan Premax said, lots of people are sending me the New York Times story on David Sacks outside of the all in sponsorship proposal, which feels oblivious at best, corrupt at worst. I'm not seeing much in there that's new, at least to those who've been following Dan Primack says, as an aside, it's true that Saks Kraft still have a ton of AI investments. Thing is, all tech investments at this point are AI investments. It's kind of like Internet investments at this Point. If you invest in tech startups, you de facto invest in AI startups. And Jason says we lost money on the event. The NYT knew this and deliberately published false information. And Dan Primack says they included statement that you lost money on it. What did they print that was false? They were somehow. That we are somehow making money in this or some gain. And Dan Primack says just re read. Just re read. Doesn't claim that all in made money. Said you tried to generate revenue via $1 million sponsorships, including for VIP reception that didn't end up happening. But adds that you don't know what but adds that you don't know what sponsors ultimately paid or that it doesn't know what sponsors ultimately paid. Included the statement that you lost money. Am I missing something? And Jason says Mr. Sacks has raised the profile of his weekly podcast all in through his government role and expanded its business. Confused? I thought you were talking specifically about the White House AI Summit pieces. Dan Primek talking in general. Don't know how you would would not quantify Sacks role in White House def raised all in profile, at least among normies. As for role in biz expansion, guess you could stake your claim there. I completely disagree with this. I feel like the all in podcast put the White House on the map. I feel like a lot of people were like they found out about the White House and about the US Government. Which house? Exactly, exactly. Because of the all in podcast. They were listening to the all in podcast and they were like, wait, wait, wait, you're telling me, wait, there's people in Washington D.C. they run this whole country. They create, they're in charge of the rules. Yeah. They create sort of laws and framework for how our country should operate, which, which industries we want to, you know, support and grow. You're telling me, you're telling me that there's a group of people and one of my besties is they're running it. This is amazing. I got to learn more about this. I got to figure out what a bill is. I got to tell how a bill turns into a law chat. What is a bill? Jason says if anything, going deep into politics has been a net negative for all in at least in my opinion, we would be growing faster and wouldn't have lost some percentage of our left leaning audience if we'd stuck to tech markets, science, vc, et cetera. That's an interesting take. I still think that politics made it so important. It made it so big. Well, yeah, and it made the content polarizing. But I think that polarizing in Media is good. You actually get more attention. Not necessarily good from all points of view, but good from a pure, just like reach. I mean, yeah, I was looking at the. I think the ratings or like the amount of viewers for like CNBC is bigger than Bloomberg by like a pretty significant margin because Bloomberg's like extra wonky and CNBC's a little bit. I mean, it's literally called consumer business news. Like that's what the C stands for, I believe. And then you have Fox, which is even more like Fox News is political and it's much bigger ratings than CNBC or Bloomberg. And then ESPN is like by far the biggest because it's like sports. Everyone loves sports. And so maybe that's the final form. They should go full poker and then full sports. It should just become SportsCenter competitor. I could see it might be the way AB says, I only learned about Trump because Chamath endorsed him. Yes, exactly. I had never heard of this guy. Who? The vodka and social media entrepreneur. He's running for president. Okay, so Dan Primack is weighing in again. Concluding it, he says the New York Times story was mostly a nothing burger, at least for those familiar with the situation. As for hoax, the story itself as published isn't being disputed. Obviously the New York Times had info questions that Sachs lawyers answered and disproven info wasn't included. That's how journalism works. The real complaint seems to be about the headline quote, silicon Valley's man in the White House is benefiting himself and his friends. I get the complaint, but that's not. But it's really a matter of interpretation. Not true, false hoax. Imagine if you had a friend and they went to the White House and they didn't try and benefit you. You'd feel, you'd feel like you might. Not be friends with them. You might not be friends with him anymore. Sachs and the Trump White House are pursuing let them cook AI policy. I like that. That they believe will help us win the AI race and that the rewards outweigh the risks. Others disagree. Yeah, this is so true. It's like there is no, like, oh, like we now know the correct way to win the AI war. We know that there's a correct way. It's very obvious. It's like, no, everyone's debating this constantly, even inside of tech. And Sachs has one view that I think has actually played out pretty well. Considering that he's been anti doomer, anti fast takeoff, more industrial capacity, more opportunity to grow gdp. There are some elements of his takes that are a little bit more like TBDs. Like what actually happens to jobs over the long term? How does it manifest in GDP growth over the long term? But, but so far I think he's been correct and I think that's what Dan Primek's saying here. He says only time will tell if Sachs is correct. What we know for sure though is that his deregulatory policies should help VC funds, his those runs by his friends, those run by strangers, et cetera. Thus the headline is defensible, albeit pushing an agenda. And that's the timeline in turmoil folks. Let me tell you about graphite.dev code review for the age of AI. Graphite helps teams on GitHub ship higher quality software faster. I can't read this. AI Amblicus this name, this Ilia interview will be compulsory viewing for any future student trying to understand what misallocation of capital looks like in real life. See, I completely disagree with this take. People were going back and forth on this. We talked about this a little bit over the holidays, but fleeting in bits says. Can you say more? Just that he doesn't have any business direction or something else. And, and the original poster says these are my intuitions but for what it's worth on the micro level, he just seems to drift in a sea of possibility and not. See I originally read this as. The misallocation of capital that I've seen is like the 10th, 11th, 12th foundation model lab that has like 100 to a billion dollars that is just like kind of iterating on what Ilya already worked on and already developed. Right. And doesn't necessarily like if they just do, if they just create a model that's like not state of the art, like I don't know that there's going to be incredible value in that. Meanwhile I'm like okay, you take the guy that, that, that whose work led to ChatGPT and you give him a few billion dollars and let him, you know, continue to iterate and, and he's not just like you know, firing a single can, you know, multi billion dollar cannon and hoping he hits a target. It's like this incremental research that I think is still one of the best shots at like developing the next paradigm, whatever comes after LLM. So I, I read this, I, I think that your, your reading of this was right, but I initially read it the other way and I was like yeah, I do think this is, you know, somewhat, somewhat bearish on the, on the, the incremental large language model lab. Yeah, I don't know, I mean I can, I can kind of steel, man. Both. Like we're gonna have Julian on the show in when is he coming on at? Or we're having Vincent from Prime Intellect come on the show and I was talking to him. We'll get more information from him. He's going to be on at 1:40. But Vincent was explaining that more and more and more companies and different business processes, they do need specific training runs, they do need the skill sets of a foundation model lab, but they're not. But there's a lot of business to be done that's not purely AGI seeking, not purely paradigm shifting. So I do think that there's some value there if the business can be run well, which is a big if. But there is a path where a thinking machines or one of these companies is going to go and do specific reinforcement learning, specific model development for a specific company and task that can work out. It's a very different business than searching for the next paradigm doing science. And maybe you shouldn't even call it a lab because you're not really even trying to do foundational science necessarily. You're more productizing company. Yeah, it's a business, which is great. We love that. What's interesting about Ilya is that when we talked about this, it is a venture style bet, like let the scientist go experiment, maybe it will work out. It's extremely high risk, probably a zero, but if it works, it's huge. Right. So the expected value is still high. What's crazy is that we're doing a venture style bet at growth scale and it's just massive amount of capital for something that I think the consensus here is that it's either he solves it and it's incredibly valuable and leapfrogs everything and is just amazing, or it's just you do get lost and you get lost in the sea of research and ideas and you never really produce anything. So I love the high risk bets. I just understand why people are saying at that scale it's a lot of money. That's a lot of money. But that has been happening internally at Google for a long time. They probably burned a lot of money on research projects. Hasn't been that big of a deal because they had the engine for it and if the investors are significantly diversified, they should be fine. Anyway, what else is in the timeline today? Fin AI, the AI that handles your customer support. The number one AI agent for customer service. We did get a good meme, we got a couple good memes. Cody says when my wife asks what we should eat for dinner, but says no to my first two suggestions. We are back to the age of research. I like it. And then when she asks what I want for dinner from Bazelord, the answer to that question will reveal itself. I think there will be lots of possible answers. Very true. It's a great new meme template. I like it. When my husband asks how many Amazon packages are still on the way, the answer to that question will reveal itself. I think there will be lots of possible answers, but I think that's actually true. If he creates some new AI, there's a bunch of different ways to monetize it. We know this is a fact. But of course Ilya is now joining the ranks of Yann Lecun and Rich Sutton and Andre Karpathy of sort of industry legends that are more or less saying that scaling is over and LLMs are dead. On the other side. Sholto is saying scaling maybe not over. So we'll see. This is what this post is. Yeah, this post is great. Scaling is over and LLMs are a dead end. Aw, you're sweet. Scaling is over and LLMs are a dead end. Hello Human Resources. I love this meme template because it's like, yeah, Jan Lecun has been saying the same thing. He says, Jan says. For the record, my current BMI is 24. This guy rocks. Very funny. I thought he would have dropped the meta tag on X by now, but I guess he's still. Oh, he's still repping them. Didn't he leave? Okay, he's like on his way out, more or less. Another 1 billion to SSI. There's a bunch of this in the SSI bucket. Let me tell you about Profound get your brand mentioned in ChatGPT reach millions of consumers who use AI to discover new products and brands. Of course we are having Dylan Patel on the show in 12 minutes and we should do a little bit of a run through of the drama on the timeline. The timeline was in turmoil. Lots of people very upset with semianalysis Latest Post how dare you. How dare you take a they took a swing at the King, which was the name of their article. They said tpuv7 google takes a swing at the King. The King is of course Nvidia and they are asking is this potentially the end of the cuda mote Anthropics. They're talking about anthropics. One gigawatt TPU purchase the more TPU meta ssi xai OpenAI anthropic buy the more GPU capex you save. Next generation TPU V8 and they're going into what the battle between TPU and the next generation GPU out of Nvidia will look like. And this upsets some people. There's a lot of folks who are long Nvidia either they have invested in Nvidia, they made a lot of money Nvidia or their their whole business is tied to Nvidia or AMD even and. So or they bought the local top. A month or potentially there's a whole bunch of reasons. You could also just disagree with this and you could just think that you know that semianalysis their takeaways are wrong. But I think it's a thought provoking article. I think there's a lot of data, they're extremely thorough and I think that they do leave you with with a lot of new information that you can do with what you want. And I think in general the response to this article was very positive. But there were some folks who were very upset by it and went all. Over the place anon accounts that put a noun and then capital as their name and suddenly they're an expert on everything. Yes, yes, yes. Yeah it was a little odd seeing the credentialism come out from the anons cause I don't think we should get in the two can play that game camp. It's a little bit rough but there's a little bit of interesting stuff in here. I want to read through some of this. Let's kick it off with the opening of the semianalysis article. The two best models in the world, Anthropic's Claude 4.5 opus and Google's Gemini 3 have the majority of their training and inference infrastructure on Google TPUs and Amazon's Trainium. Now Google is selling TPUs physically to multiple firms. Is this the end of Nvidia dominance? The dawn of the AI era is here and it's crucial to understand that cost structure of AI driven software deviates considerably from traditional software. Chip microarchitecture and system architecture play a vital role in the development and scalability of these innovative new forms of software. The hardware infrastructure on which AI software runs has a notably larger impact on CapEx and OpEx and subsequently the gross margins. In contrast to earlier generations of software where developers costs were relatively larger. Consequently, it is even more crucial to devote considerable attention to optimizing your AI infrastructure to be able to deploy software. Firms that have an advantage in infrastructure will also have an advantage in the ability to deploy and scale applications with AI. And they say we've long Believed that the TPU is among the world's best systems for AI training and inference. Neck and neck with King of The Jungle Nvidia 2.5 years ago we wrote about TPU supremacy and this thesis has proven to be very correct. TPU's results speak for themselves. Gemini 3 is one of the best models in the world. And there's a very funny bit in here I need to find it. Saving. Oh yeah, here. So this is, this is a very spicy line in here. He says OpenAI hasn't even deployed TPUs yet and they've already saved 30% on their entire lab wide Nvidia fleet. This demonstrates how the perf per TCO advantage of TPUs is so strong that you already get the gains from adopting TPUs even before turning one on. And so basically what he's explaining is that because of the competitive dynamic between Nvidia and Google with the CPU now you can use TPU as a stalking horse and say hey, if you don't cut your prices, Nvidia, we know that you have really high margins or not. Even cut prices but encourage an investment. Exactly. And so that's what they're Nvidia. Nvidia would rather invest back into your business instead of cutting. Yes. And so says we think the more realistic explanation is that Nvidia aims to protect its dominant position at the Foundation Labs by offering equity investment rather than cutting prices which would lower gross margins and cause widespread investor panic. Below we outlined the OpenAI and anthropic arrangements to show how Frontier Labs can lower GPU total cost of ownership by buying or threatening to buy TPUs. And so OpenAI Nvidia the, you know, it was $22 billion per gigawatt the rest of the system. So it's a 34 billion dollar billion per gigawatt expense to Nvidia. But Nvidia is doing effectively an equity rebate of $10 billion per gigawatt in investment. And so how that works out is a 29% partner discount. Anthropic has similar math but a little bit higher at 44% partner discount because Microsoft is paying for a piece of it. And so it's an interesting thesis and it's unclear exactly like well, if the claim that the investors will panic if it was actually just lower gross margins. Well if you say the quiet part out loud like this and you have, you know, you do the math to show that there is basically a discount that margins might be coming down because of competitive dynamics, does that wind up resulting in investor panic? I mean Certainly it didn't today. Isn't Nvidia up today? Right, yeah, Nvidia is up 1%. Adding a casual, you know what, 10 trillion or 100 billion or something. 10 billion quadrillion, yeah, gigajillion. Yeah. Just, I mean, and again, we said this earlier on the show, but Broadcom is down almost 4% today, which I would have expected it to be the other direction given that to actually buy TPUs physically, you need to go through Broadcom. Yeah, yeah. So a lot of people are going back and forth on, you know, can semianalysis be trusted? Because they're writing about Nvidia and Dylan, I think some people didn't understand that he was joking. Zephyr here has a post. Dylan is being tongue in cheek, but he's not wrong. Nvidia was extremely dominant for the last three years. As we saw in the stock. It's up 10x over the last three years. New competitors will cause a reduction in market share and margin compression. But TAM is big, so revenue profits won't go down. 75% of GM is just unsustainable. Hyperscalers will also use the TPU's threat to extract better deals from Jensen. Priority access for Rubin, Feynman or discounts on GPUs. Jensen called Altman and initiated the $10 billion deal after he saw the information about the information article about OpenAI testing TPUs. And so this is in reaction to that point about OpenAI hasn't even deployed TPUs yet and they've already saved 30%. There's a decent post here from just another pod guy. They say Dylan speedrunning through all the learnings of sell side research, industry capture, pissing off IR execs, gatekeeping info based on client tier difficulty scaling beyond single star analysts, distorted MSN representation of your notes, eventually spending too much time marketing versus researching amazing biz content. Though obviously Dylan would push back on a lot of this stuff. If you actually read through the entire article, there's nothing in the article should actually in. This article should be that surprising because so much of the article is just referencing old semianalysis research, some of which they did sort of before the paywall, some of which they did under the paywall. But it felt like a kind of a culmination of everything that they've been saying for a really long time. And I think that. But part of. I think the surprise here is just how much faster this conversation has really come to a head than people may have expected. I think at least surface level on the timeline. I think people Felt like the TPU threat was maybe like a 2026, 2027 conversation versus being like, it's a part of these buying discussions right now negotiations. Yeah, yeah. The other buried lead in the article was of course about pre training. So there's a snippet in here. OpenAI's leading researchers have not completed a successful full scale pre training run that was broadly for a New Frontier model since GPT 4.0 in May of 2024. And you know, this is, it's so interesting that this, like, if this was wrong, you would imagine that there would be a whole bunch of reaction from OpenAI people or like proxies or surrogates. Right. People quote tweeting and be like, that's just not true. Wow, something else is cooked. But the fact that I haven't seen anyone respond to this and say like, oh, this is wrong. Like we actually did not that like, that's the North Star for what the business is like. The business's job is to create profits, right? It's not to, you know, complete successful full scale pre training runs. That's not the goal. That's just something that they might do in service of making a better model, making a better product. But ultimately it's whatever the customers want. And if the customers are happy with 4.0 level base pre train and a bunch of reasoning on top, that's fine. So what, what else is in the back and forth? People are also, I mean really, it does make me happy that we didn't go deeper into ranking people because it does feel like when you create a list of tiers and rank a bunch of people, you're just creating a big bucket of enemies down at the bottom of people who want you dead because you rank them low. But I'm sure we'll get into the discussion of cluster max and how people are interpreting cluster max because there's a whole bunch of ways to read it. One way to read it is which, which stock should you buy? Right? But like that's not necessarily the read. The other, the other, the other read is like, which product is the best to work with as a customer. But it's like, what customer are you? Yeah, there are some that are in the lower tiers that are fantastic for very specific use cases. Like this is the nature of every business. Like one of the Neo clouds that was particularly upset with Dylan is in a very niche market. But if you're, if you're in that niche market is probably a great product. It's probably great for you if you're if you satisfy like this specific list of criteria and you don't need these features, you're probably fine then. But it's, it's a lot of fun. People are going back and forth. They're also debating whether or not Dylan is, is independent given that he lives with Sholto from Anthropic. And we got to ask him why, why he has roommates. Not even. I'm not even concerned about a conflict. It's roommate gate. Yeah, it's roommate gate. But what about this other tinfoil hat post from Jukon? My theory is that Meta deliberately leaked the story to the information about Google's about acquiring Google's TPUs for meta. It's a classic risk free power play. The moment Jensen Huang reaches wind, catches wind of Meta using Google Silicon, Nvidia is likely to rush in with an investment. They might even be negotiating as we speak. This allows Meta to secure capital and shift from burning their own cash to potentially getting discounts or effectively buying Nvidia chips with Nvidia's own money. Plus, if they actually do secure Google TPUs, they solve their compute shortage. It covers all bases. I wonder when other hyperscalers will catch on to this magic wand. All you have to do is hint at using TPUs. Hey, but the issue, the issue is how many red flags would be waving if Jensen was like, yeah, we're investing $20 billion in Meta. We're very excited about, we're very excited about Meta and owning a piece of. Yeah, that seems very, very odd. So he's in a position where I don't know what kind of leverage Jensen has around in those conversations with Meta because he doesn't want a discount. And it's not like OpenAI where you can just announce an investment or an anthropic, et cetera. So how does any type of like rebate actually happen? Is the question. Yeah. Well, before we bring in our next guest, let me tell you about TurboPuffer, serverless vector and full text search built from first principles and object storage, fast 10x cheaper and extremely scalable. Let's read through some more TPU stuff to set the table. So Clive Chan says, I keep seeing stuff about tpu. Has anything materially new happened? There's no evidence Google has ever trained Gemini on non TPU hardware going back to pre GPT models like BERT. TPUs predate Nvidia's own tensor cores, anthropic and character and SSI and midjourney have long used TPUs. I'd be surprised if Meta weren't looking at them, Nvidia's moat has never been deep for the big labs. See OpenAI deciding it could do better than Cuda and investing in Triton instead regularly edging out CUDNN on benchmarks. There's nothing magical or structural about any of this, just good engineers doing good work. TPUs are not that much more efficient than GPUs, and small performance per watt difference are dwarfed by whether Meta has the right kernels and systems engineering talent to pull it off. Both Nvidia's and Google's moats are small, and we are still at the point where individual good engineers can flip the entire balance. Why was this not priced in? This is all super old public info. I have a feeling that, that this Clive Chan, who I guess is over at was it Tesla and then OpenAI is a little bit of like first time in the public markets, first time realizing that the people who trade this stuff are not necessarily like on the super inside of the labs, actually understanding the decisions that are being made inside the labs. Like it's a completely separate ecosystem. And that's why organizations like Semi Analysis exist. And I believe we have Dylan Patel from Semi Analysis in the Re Shrimp waiting room. Let's bring him in. Dylan, how are you doing? I'm doing fantastic. How about yourself? You know, I saw. I saw the meme image that you guys put out there for me, so I had to wear. Let's go, let's go. Dude, we need a bigger, bigger screen for that bicep. We'll. We'll work on it. Let's go. Where in the world are you? I'm in Florida, spending Thanksgiving with my family here. I'm trying to chill out a little bit. It's nice to have the family pamper me a little bit because I broke my foot a couple weeks ago. I'm sorry, how'd you break your foot? Tripped over a TPU family. Family reunion playing football in Texas. We're American as we can get. There you go. Well, I. We were just running through a little bit of the TPU article. Can you actually set the table for me on, like, what do you think is new about it versus what has Semianalysis already been saying? And this is more just like tying everything in a bow. Yeah, half of the article is just referencing. We've been saying this for two years. We've been saying this for one year. And even referencing Google's own content about the TPU dating back even even further. So, yeah, I would say, I would. Say the majority of this piece was if you're. If you're a client. It's already been pretty much all published, but it hasn't been tied together. It hasn't had a narrative around.

Go. 5, 4, 3, 1. You're watching TVPN. Today's Monday, December 1, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultra Dome, the temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Ramp time is money save. Both easy use, corporate cards, bill payments, accounting and a whole lot more all in one place. We, we have a special guest, special. Guest today opening the show with us, Alby from the land down under, please. Probably saw him go viral recently, but why don't you introduce yourself? Yeah, so I just, I actually arrived in LA on Saturday. Welcome. Yeah, I'm from Sydney or Wollongong, so about an hour and a half from Sydney. And yeah, I've been building something called Finkel which is basically duolingo for life skills. And I just applied to YC as well with that post on X. How many views did you get on the application video? I think it got like 7.8 million. So yeah, let's hit the gong for Alby. Well done, well done. So give me an example of a life skill that you can learn with your app. Yeah, I guess like entrepreneurship, especially startups and stuff because like in Australia, I don't know about in the US but school is very entry level. It's not hands on. I feel like it's very, just not preparing us for life. Like you do need it if you want to be a doctor or a lawyer or something. But some kids don't want to do that. And like yes you do have commerce and computer science and stuff which I am doing as electives but they're not hands on and they're very like outdated and like textbook heavy. So I feel like actually learning life skills that can, that you can apply now especially like with AI and everything, like if you don't know how to use AI now, you sort of going to be left behind. So very exciting. What are you, what are you hoping to get out of your trip? You're on summer holiday right now? Well, like my exams just finished before I came so there's still like two weeks left of school. How do you think you did? I think I got, I got like a B in science and like there you go, a B in math. Focus on the game, focus on the game. I feel like there's room to grow. But yeah, I guess what I'm trying to get out of it is just to meet as many people as possible, make as many connections as possible because this trip probably won't, a trip like this probably won't happen again for a while. So yeah, that's Sort of my goal. What's the status of the YC application? You've submitted it? Yeah. Have you heard back yet? No, it hasn't been. Still like a recommendation? Yeah, we got a long recommendation. If you're YCLM watching this, please go leave a recommendation. Yeah, but congratulations. Thanks so much for coming by. What is the stage of development of the actual application? The product itself. Are you live? Can people go down in demo? Right now we're getting like beta testers, but the beta should be launching soon, probably by the end of this year. Do you have a wait list? Are you doing email capture yet? Yeah, like whitelist beta testers. We've got like a couple hundred, but yeah, very cool. Incredible. Well, congratulations on all the attention. I'm sure you'll convert it into a lot of opportunity and have a great trip. Yes. Great to have you by and good luck with the YC application. Thanks so much. Looking sharp in the suit. Looking sharp in the suit. Amazing. Have a good rest. Thank you. Thanks for stopping by. Before we move on to the rest of the show, let me tell you about Restream 1 livestream, 30 plus destinations. If you want to multi stream, go to restream.com.

5, 4, 3, 2, 1. You're watching TVPN. Today's Monday, December 1, 2025. We are live from the TVPN Ultradome, the Temple of technology, the fortress of finance, the capital of capital. Ramp time is money save. Both easy use, corporate cards, bill payments, accounting and a whole lot more all in one place. We have a special guest, special guest today, opening the show with us, Alby from, From the Land down under, please. Probably saw him go viral recently, but why don't you introduce yourself? Yeah, so I just, I actually arrived in LA on Saturday. Welcome. Yeah, I'm from Sydney or Wollongong, so about an hour and a half from Sydney. And yeah, I've been building something called Finkel which is basically duolingo for life skills. And I just applied to YC as well with that post on X. How many views did you get on the application video? I think it got like 7.8 million. So yeah, let's hit the gong. Pretty viral for Albie. Well done, well done. So give me an example of a life skill that you can learn with your app. Yeah, I guess like entrepreneurship, especially startups and stuff because like in Australia, I don't know about in the US but school is very entry level. It's not hands on. I feel like it's very, just not preparing us for life. Like you do need it if you want to be a doctor or a lawyer or something. But some kids don't want to do that. And like yes, you do have commerce and computer science and stuff which I am doing as electives but they're not hands on and they're very like outdated and like textbook heavy. So I feel like actually learning life skills that can, that you can apply now, especially like with AI and everything, like if you don't know how to use AI now, you sort of going to be left behind. So very exciting. What are you, what are you hoping to get out of your trip? You're on summer holiday right now? Well, like my exams just finished before I came so there's still like two weeks left of school. How do you think you did? I think I got, I got like a B in science and like there you go, a B in math. Focus on the game, focus on the game. I feel like there's room to grow. But yeah, I guess what I'm trying to get out of it is just to meet as many people as possible, make as many connections as possible because this trip probably won't, a trip like this probably won't happen again for a while. So yeah, that's sort of my goal. What's the status of the YC application? You've submitted it? Yeah. Have you heard back yet? No, it hasn't been. Still like I'll need to. Recommendation? Yeah, we got a long recommendation. If you're YCLM watching this, please go leave a recommendation. Yeah, but congratulations. Thanks so much for coming by. What is the stage of development of the actual application? The product itself. Are you live? Can people go download in demo? Right now we're getting like beta testers, but the beta should be launching soon, probably by the end of this year. Do you have a wait list? Are you doing email capture yet? Yeah, like waitlist beta testers. We've got like a couple hundred, but yeah, very cool. Incredible. Well, congratulations on all the attention. I'm sure you'll convert it into a lot of opportunity and have a great trip. Yes, great to have you. Bye and good luck with the YC application. Thanks so much. Looking sharp in the suit. Looking sharp in the suit. Amazing. Have a good rest. Thanks for stopping by. Before we move on to the rest of the show, let me tell you about Restream One Livestream 30 Plus Destinations. If you want to multi stream, go to restream.com.